A brief and plain discovery of the falseness and unscripturalness of Anabaptism : as the same is now practised by those of that persuasion ..

I?*;

* v

■

/

/

A Brief and Plain

DISCOVERY

O F T H E

Falfenefs and Unfcripturalnefs

o F

ANABAPTISM:

As the fame is now Praflis'd by thofe of

that Perfwafion: Wherein is plainly prov'd,
from God's Word, the following Particulars,

I. That God's Covenant with
Abraham, Gen. 17.7. is the
Covenant of Grace, where-
by all God's Ele& are Sa-
ved.

II. That Circumcifion was
the Initiatory Seal of that
Covenant to Abraham and
his Church-Seed , during
that Difpenfation.

III. That Water.Baptifm is
now ( under the Gofpel )
ftcceeded in the room
thereof.

IV. That the Gentile Belie-
vers and their Infant-Seed,
have as real a Right to the
fame Covenant of Grace,
and the Seal thereof, as
had Abraham and his In-
fant Seed.

V. That fprinkling (or pour-
ing out) Water, on the Sub-
ject of Baptifm, is the (un-
doubted) Right way of Ad-
miniftering Baptilm under
the Golpel,

To utfiich are added,

Some Remarks on a Namelefs Author 5 and a Poft-
fcript, occafion'd by Mr. Stennef* Reply to Kujfen.

By $imes Barry. [The Third Edhhn.l

LONDON': Printed for the Author ; and fold
by -fobn and Jofepb Marjhill at the Bible in
Gracechurch-Street, and at the Bible in Newgate-
ftreeu MDCCXV. Price 1 s.

T 0 . T H E

impartial and tlnprtjudicl

-READER^

Who defircs to be Riphdv In-

form'd in the Nature and "Defign
of Cod's Covenant wkh Abraham,
(his Friend) in the behalf of Him-
ielf and air his Ecclefiaftical Or
Church ) Seed, both among Jews
and Gentiles . to the End of the
World.'

Courteous Reader,

IF the Sprit of Grace reigns in thy Heart ■
.^00 p# ( I doubt not) readily believe me\
M serially when I mofl folemnly ' prof eft, as
\pf I were (immediately ) to be caffd to the
t Bar ofthk Great Judge) that no Prejudice
\ - ( or Hatred) againft the Perfons of the Peo-
;i fie, who ( without any Warrant from God's
■Herd ) Style themfelva Baptifis, and Bap.
I tr^d Churches of Christ, hath ftirr'd me up
i /o appear in print, in oppofwg thofe permci-
! m Principles., which the Men of that Per-
mafwn do ( with Jo much Violmct and un-
A . 2 fcriptural

To the Reader.

fcripttral Zeal J Teach and Maintain. I
finccr ely blcjs Cod, that his good Spirit hath
taught me to diftinguifi between Perfons, and
the Errors which they hold and maintain.
Their Perfcns I love, and am really gritv'd
t'jat I love them no more than I do. And I
hope neither they nor any others will be angry
with me. for fo doing : But their Errors { in
Religion ) I do from my Heart abominate and
loath , becaufe hateful to God, and all good
Men, who know and under ft and them Jo to be,
-dnd for thus doing, I ntither fear a Frown
from God,nor ytt Blame from any Man, [tru-
ly wije ) who is able to dijimguijh Truth from
Error.

That J pall be cenfwSd and ( uncharitably )
reflected on, for what I have done, in print-
ing this fmall Trail:, J am not infenftble : I
am very f ure 'none will thru do, but fitch at ei-
ther know not, or care not what they fay.

Thefe kind of Blows I am taught to ward
off with a Religion* Scorn and a Holy Con-
tempt ', refolving ( in Chrifts Strength ) to
■purfue and hold fkjt the Truth of God, let
who will bark and cavil againsl it. It was
the Saying of Valerius Maximus, iEquo Am-
ino ferenda funt, hnperitorum Convitia,
& ad Honefta vadenti, Contemnendus eft,
ifte Contemplus. The Reproaches ( faith
he ) of the Ignorant and Unskilful are to be
born with an even (or patient J Mind ■':

And

To the Reader.
And he that intends to advance towards
Good and Honeil things, -mult contemn
their Contempt.' That fomewhat will come
out in ahfwer hereto, I qtteftion not, ( if the Men
of that Principle have not loft their old Wont )
hut (my Comfort and Confidence being built
on the Rock of Ages ) I -never fay a Confuta-
tion from my, nay all, of that Perjwafton,
who breath on the Earth, until the) procure
{from Heaven ) another Gofpef which is (JDi~
armtrically ) oppofite to the G off el delivered by
the Son of God, which I am fire will nevir
he..

I have made no Deviation from the good old
way chalkt out by Abraham5* GW, ( wherein
the* Prophets and Apoftlei, with ail the Pri-
mitive Churches, who are gone to Heaven,
walkt in) thm-l hiowof t If I have, 1 do
faithfully promife, that ( upon the dijeovery
of my- Error, ) I will own my f elf therein nuf
taken, -

■ I have been (for fever al Tears paft ) impor-
tuned by many ferioiti and godly Chriftians,
to print what now I expeli to be blani 7d for,
but never found my jelj ( thereto I indm'd, till
of late : not- that 1 queftion any part of wl at
1 have printed, being Gocfs Truth ; but v, -
need, the variety of Try ah and fitarp AffMi-
ons^ which have (incejfantly ) followed n,e,
fince caii'-d to the Sacred Office, both in my
Native City '(Dublin) and alfo z>z England,
A 3 . ? - have

To the Reader.
oavi kept me wacr \ together <v tb my own
great Averfim to appear m Fruity in any
tmtroverfiitl But cbfcrvi??g ( of
\nh ) bow frangeiy u4:-i 'ah \aptifm fpr cads both
in City, and Country:, and being fteiix i online d^
that Ignoramt of' (and IJnacanantcdnefs
mil/) ih^Govpmm-Qf '.Grsee3 was ( and ft ill
p ) that xchkb hath guvin Advantage to the
Preachers .of that w>ny, in draw tig Profibytu
aftir them, I have ( in Conference of my 1) a -
t)\ both to God and Men ) improved my poor
'Talent, in explaining and opening up the
Jxature and ^efign of tne Covenant of Grace,
tea'd® with Abraham in Gen. 17, 7. in hopes,
that Cod irill tiefs the Plainmfs and Brevity
therein its'd, to inform poor ignorant (and
unthinking ) Souls, how wretchedly they ate
imfGtfed upon by Preachers of that Perfwafi-
on^ who have ( them/elves ) as great need to
be inflruHcd and taught, what the deep My*
Jt erics of the Covenant of Grace be, as the
poor (Tongue-ty d , Babes, whom they (in ■vain')
labour to exclude and fat out from tie Bene-
fits and Seal oj thatt Covenant, in the Vifiblz
Churches of Christ, /is their denying Abra-
ham^ Covenant, to be the Covenant of Grace,
adminiftcrs jaft ground of ' fufptliirg, whether
they have any other than dark and confused
Notions about the Bollrim of God^s Free
Grace, (fo much fpoken of in Pulpit and
Print.)

To die Reader,
SotheirVnm&rcifulnefs and Hard hearted-
nefs to the Infants of believing Parent *f ik
not allowing fuch to be accounted of the nnm
her of God's Elect i mierly became of. the In ,
capacity of fuck, to male an open Profejfwn of
Faith and Repentance themselves, adminijhrs
PiF$ ground of fufpecring M>lth^jhjxhlMlr
thqdoxjn the Doctrine ' ofEMbion. -J am very,
fare the State of Infancy can neither null or
make void the Electing Decree of Gody nor
yet render the EleB Infant anyway uncap able
of that Grace of God's Covenant to which he
is E letted, or of the Seal of that Covenant of
Grace in the Church VifMe-, for any id hold
or fay it doth, is to reflcft on th* mo ft HI ok
God, and to make him a mutable Agent, Uke
to a Fickle Man, contrary to Mat 3* 6. Rom.
11. 2P. and {unavoidably ) to fend all Eletl
Infants to Hell, {who die Infants ) contrary
roMar. 10. 14. jo. 6. 39. Rom. 11. 7. All
that I fn all farther fay, is only to be? and pray
thee, for the Lord's fake, for thy%wn Soils
fake, and for that Love and Tcndemefs, which
the. Law of Nature Qefpecmlly that of Grace)
obliges thee- to have for poor Infants, ( if thou
be a Parent) con fider well, and weigh jud.'ci-
oufy ( in the BalUnce of God: s Santfuary) the
Arguments laid down in this f mall Trail, to
prove what I have {therein ) undertaken. ?- If
God blefs the ~ Reading thereof, to the keeping
thee back from Ffpoujing the Errors herein
A: 4 decrfd;

To the Reader.
decry* d-, or if it foodd prove the occafion of
thy Vomiting up {by found Repentance and
hearty Reformation ) the love and likln? thou
Lift had to thof Principles of DarfaejT, give
I the Glory of his ever* Grace, and jaffhr
■thy felf no longer to be impos'd on by juch
Preachers, who Are not only Intruders into
i tie Sacred Office, hut alfo Heterodox and Vn-
mtnd, in what they teach concerning God*s
Covenant with Abraham, being a Covenant
if Works • concerning Infant L+$&pifntv being
tftft a Pepifo Invention, and a piece of Will"
fVorjftip • and what they Teach and confi-
dently yjjfrm of dipping, being the only right
Mode of Baptising commanded by Chrift, and
prdWfed by John aitd all the fir ft $apf iters \
By which Principles they raj c the very Foun-
dation of Salvation to grown Believers^ as
wc!> as to their Infants : f.nd difown, that
thrift hath any right Gofpel Churches but
thimfehes : From which Principles I finill e->
w fay, and heartily pray, Good Lord De-
liver me, and all the Families of thy Faith-
ful People.

T H E

INTRODUCTION.

An occasional Difcourfe between a Minifrer
and a Church Member, concerning In-
fant Baptifm ; wherein funclry material
QuefKons are put by, the Church Mem-
ber ^ and plainly and particularly An-
fwered by the Minirter,- for the Infor-
mation of the Ignorant, and the Satisfa-
ction of flich as are daggering in their
Judgments, about the Lawfulnefs of In-
iaiits-Baptifm,

Minifler. Brother Edward,. By what I
have heard from feme of my Neighbours^ at
aifi by the Difcourfe which pafi between yon
#nd> me when tali together ^ I fufpeff ihdi \
fome have been tampering with yo#, to draw
you away to Anabaptifm \ is it jo- or no ? deal
plain ly, to the end I micht addrefs my ft If to
my Bnigi in giving yon fatis faction i-lsi ?<->/,
from God's Y/ord.

Church Member. I malt m geriioudy ac-
knowledge, Sir, that I am not without \fa*
vering, and doubtful Thoughts in my Mind
about Infant - Baptifm, occ aliened partly^
by difcourfmg with fome of that Way and.
PerfWapoii- partly by reading fome Books
' which were put into my handy which to

The 'Introduction.

me feemsfullof Clearnefs, that Infant-Bap-
tifnl is no way warrantable or juftifiable by
theGofpel of Chrift.

Mini It. Ifind th&n that lam not mifiaken
in my Jlpprehenfion of you in this Matter : but
for your Encouragement, I muff tell yon, that
xoh arc but tryed herein by a Temptation -r for
rirfoici I think never the worfe of your Sojds
State , neither are my HQpes and Confidence of
your Integrity towards God, a Jot ar Whit lef-
'hied by "the Inclination in your Mind to fa-
vour that Opinion i for I have known fame ve-
ry Holy and upright -Hearted Chrifiians, who
in the Simplicity of their Hearts, have ftrongly
inclined to favour and efpoufe that Caufe and
Principle, as the rnosi plaufiblc, and likely to a-
(nee with the Gofpel, there king no Mention
% all of Infant- Baptifm in the Gofpel, nei-
ther in Precept, nor yet iri Example^ to recom-
mend it • yea, I my felf have ( in my fi, si fet-
t{r'(t out in the ways of Chrifiianity ) met with
Temptations to draw me to that Opinion \> and
that by the very fame means which hath occa-
{■on cd \ our ft agger i'ng kcni>n. ^nd the main

.'fwijicb Indue at me to hanker aft it that
fripciplc) were, ( 1. ) The high and chanta-
hit 0 pm. on I had of fome of that Party, being
Akn o; hiah yhtainmuits in Grace and Uofptl
HoU'cfs.*<il.) Thi-re appearing to me no
demand for h.f ant -Baptifm in all the G of-
pd nor y it any ok e I r. fiance wrn-c fit isfaid

' tint

The fntrododion.

that [neb were Baptized. ( 3. ) The many
Quotations of Learned Divines and Com*
cits, which the Anabaptifts Books offered me
were all of their Judgment and Pcrfwafion-
herein \ which much ftartkd, and fwayd me
to kind j4pprehenfwns of their way; ( 4. )
Their branding Infant -Baptifm with tht
black Brand of WilUWorfmp and Bopery\ a*
gain ft both which I always had ( fiftce 1 knew
Chrift in the G off el of his Grace ) and ever
foall have ( I humbly hope in- Chrift- ? a Mortal'
Diflike, and rooted Hatred. By means of tin-
four particulars now mentioned, I was drawn
to the very Verge or Brink of Anahaptijm, being
juft on the point of renouncing my Baptilm
( received in my Infant Stan ) as being a meet-
Nullity or no Baptifm at all. ASy roving Spi*
tit thus fluctuating and t offing between the
Waves and Billows of doubtful and dftr ailing
Cogitations : what I had best to do in thU.
Cafe, whether to offer my felf to be Dipt , yea:*
or not ? or to addrefs my felf to Adiniftcrs 0?
the contrary Judgment forRefolutionrf in fa-
weighty and material a point : ) Matters being
thus, J providentially and happily hafpimei
into the Company of fome of the- Convregatie-
nal Verfwafion, Men no whit infer iour to thsft-
Ifomuch admire dy ( for Piety ) and HoLntf*-
and who £/ very well knew) wereable to injhufr
and teach ths others for Matter of Learning
and deep- Kn&svkdge in the A/hftcries of Hi

:■ Goffi-

The Introduction;

G off el: Thefe debating fn dry foints in Con-
trover fie between the Anabaftffis and the Or-
thodoxy Protefiant, Reformed Churches, con-
cerning Infant -Baft if m :, / apprehended and
fan Jo far into the My fiery of liaptifm^ that I
was at a ft and, and began to queftion whether
I was not under a Deliifion and d jliking my In-
fant-Baft ijm, received in Infancy , by means
hereof 1 wa6 Jiirrcd uf to Fray earwfily to
God, that his good Sfirit might teach and
guide me in the way of Go'peWTruth } which
was feconded by a diligent jearch h to the Ho-
ly Scripture, and a careful Reading andweifh-
wg the Arguments brought by both Parties,
t\<:h for and again ft Infant- Baft ifm. And
w a fliort time { through the ffcc'ai Ajflftance
f: ice Spirit of ChriVt) I was enabled to fee
tend, under fiand that there was nothing of fo-
lidwdioht in the Real on s brouoht again ft In-
rant- Baft iju;y but what are in reality u.pi*g-
u,utt, and contraditlory to the Word oj God :
as will ( I hope ) in time, mo ft plainly affear to
xoirr Vnderfianding. I have been the more
prolix in J peaking my Experience herein, that
yon might become fenfble, that even Godly
Men might be entangled in erroniovss Opinions.
And to Ittyoii know what be the ordinary means
jo rfcape the Nets of Crafty Men, who lye in
wait tocnfn*x$ foor, nr.fi able ( though Hone ft
well-meanug ) Souls. Now , as Chris~b
: Lord and Mafier ) [aid to Peter, after

his

The Introduction.
his Recovery from his Fall : When thou art
Converted, ftrerigthen thy Brethren, Luke
22. So I am now come, as my Duty binds mey
to endeavour your Recovery y and full Satisfa-
ction tn thcfe Points^ abont Infant-Bafttfmy
- wherein ) on Jeem to ft agger.

Church- Member. 1 hope I can fay (thro'
fpecial Grace ) that I am no way f md of
Erronr : But whatl do herein, I do it real-
ly from nry Confcience, according to the
Light thereof: I hope, Sir, you will not
4)!ame- me for acling according thereto.

- Mini ft. I am far from arraigning your
-Integrity to God, being very fen fible that
herein you are but under a Temptation-) as
fir oncer Chriftians than you or I have been,
and now are 7 neither JhaU I { in the leaf) at-
tempt to pre] s you to aft. herein again si: your
Conjcience :■ Confcience ( / am fenfible ) is a..
tender things which is to be informed, not vio-
lently impel? d or forced, I hope you have
the fame Charity for me, as to believe that
what I do Aft in Baptizing the Infant Seed of
encovenanted Parents, and pleading for, fuch y
I do the fame from my Confcience, being fully
perfwaded that what I do herein, is accord-
ing to the Word of God : But though I do not
take on me to force or lord it over your Con-
fcience) I hope you mil, without Offence, give
me leave to ufe the freedom of a P [aft or with
)ou> in doing two things^ in order to recover

yoa

The Introduction.

you. The fir & is to reprove you for going out'
of the way of Duty, in expofing your Con-
fcience to thofe Soul deluding Entanglement sy
which have occafionedyonr prefient Difturbance^
and Vnfiettlednefis in your Principles, by de-
luding Entanglements ; / mean your going out
of the way of your Calling, to ft are and gaze
( out of Curiofity ) at the Plunging of Perfons
under the Water ', which ( albeit) jou and others-
may think may be done without either Offence
toyour Brethren, or any kind of Danger to your
felf ^ hath in it an infiatuating, charming
Energie, to allure and draw into a liking of it.
Tour frequent difcourfng with Men of that
Principle, who ( you very well know } glory
not a little in Profclyting People to that way ;
jlnd your fo much delighting to Read their
Books, being not able to grapple with fuch
fiubtlle Enemies -, the Deceit of whofe Argu-
ments lyes covered under a falfe Vizard. By
thefe your Pratlifes you have filled the Eyes
of your Confidence Jo full of that Duft and
Smoak, which is always raifed by- doubtful
Deputations ; that f on want of your Monitor ^
i^your Confidence J mean } you are now at an
apparent ft and in thofie wajts of Truth wherein
you ought to run fiwifitly -, and well it were ifi
jou had been at a ft and before you had fio fiar
advanced in thtfie unficriptural Tsnents : Bat
however , (feeing you are not a fc ended fo high
( in thefe Errors ) as to be fieated in the Scorn-

crs

' The Introdud'iorr.

ers-Chalr, to laugh at and deride Baby-fprink-
Urn, as a piece of Will-Worfnp and rrteer Po-
pery j as the Anabaptifts are well known to
term and account Infant- Baptifm : ( not for
want of Ignorance and Prejudice, the Lord
knows. J Ijliall now in the fecond place endea-
vour to help you out of this Quagmire, into
which your- own- incauteloufnefs and finful Cu-
rlofity hath ( by the Art of a fubtile Adverfa-
ry ) involved you : In order then to a fpeedy
helping you herein , / defire you will reduce
thofe things wherein you defire' to be fatisfied
( about Infant Baptifm ) to as few Heads , ( and
in as plain a Adethod) as y cut poffibly can, and
then Ijliall endeavour to anfwer your Objecti-
ons^ wherein ( I faithfully promife you ) Ijliall
mosl freely refer my Jeff to the Word of God,
and to the Writings of thofe Divines now in
Glory : At whofe Writings the WifeH of Ana-
haptifis are glad to tight their Candle^ though
in the point of Baptifm they are accounted
neither able nor worthy to teach them. And
when you and I are come to Cone luf on, you in
objecting, and I in anfwering, it will then ap-
pear whether Infant- Baptifm be. any part of
WtH-Worjliip or meer Popery,. as it is repre-
JentedbyitsAdverfar'es*

Church- Afemk Sir, Mike your Propofal
very well, and in compliance with your
reasonable Requeft, as alio in order to my
own Satisfaction, I (hall reduce thofe parti-
culars

The Introduction.

cularswrere:n I deftre to be fatisfied, to 3
Genera] Heads, under each of which I hope
you will give me Liberty to propofe, by
way of Obje&ioa, what I think convenient
and fit to ilart.

MinifL / like very well to hear you name but
3 General Heads * / hope you will ohferve Or-
der and Method in what you intend to. Objctl
under thofc $ Heads.

Church- -Me mb. I will obferve Order and
Method as well as I can ; and fliall ( I hope)
with becoming Candor, weigh in the Bal-
lanceof an impai tial and uupi cjudicate Con-
fideration and Judgment, what Strength ap-
pears to be in fofct An Twer 5 and in cafe f
find my Conscience fatisfied by the Strength
of your Anfwer, 1 (hall readily own it, and
give Glory to God.

iMinifl. J difire you to name the 3 General
Heads^ for fear we (l:ould forget them when we
come to be earmfi in our Vifpute.

Church Memb. The 3 General Heads
which I propofe to be fatisfied in, are as fol-
low : 1. The Covenant which God made,
with Abraham, mentioned in Gen. 1.7. 7.
2, The Seal of that Covenant. And 3.
The Subjefts who have a vifible Right to
that Covenant and the Seal thereof Under
thefe 3 Heads, I fuppofe, may be brought
in all that I need to fay.

• MinifL

The Intfociucricn.

Minifh Jls touching your fir ft General
Head, viz. The Covenant which God made
with Abraham, What would you be at, a-
bout it.

Church Memb. I would pray you to clear
it up from the Word of God, that that
Covenant is a Covenant of Grace, and not
a Covenant of Works j for the Apprehenfi-
on I always had, till of late, that that Co-
venant was the Covenant of Grace, was the
Foundation whereon my former Principle,
yi&i Infant-Baptifm was founded •, but be-
ing informed and taught otherwife, both
by Mens Preaching, and alfo by their Books 5
I am much in doubt as touching the lawful-
nefs of Infant-Baptifm.

Minifh / perceive then yon apprehend that
Infant Baptifm is like to ft and or fall, as the
Covenant of God with Abraham, is proved to
be either a Covenant of Grace or otherwife ;
What if it be made good from the Word of God,

a

that the Covenant of God with Abraham is
Covenant of mcer Grace !

Church Memb Truly, to be plain and
ingenious, I cannot fee how Infant-Baptifm
can Hand, if that Covenant be a Covenant
of Works:, as I ara^fenfible the Baptifts
hold and teach it is V. and which I am incli-
ned, under' my prefect light, to judge it
miul be as they fa v. But in cafe it beprb-
-ved otherwife, I plainly fee the Anabap-

tifts

The Introduction.

tiffs are like to fuffer a miferableShipwrack v
fo r their hold ing aad _. teaching that G odY
Cpve^a nt with Abraham is a Covenant of
Works, is the jpnncipai Pillar, on which7
ajmolf all their Arguments agai nit Infant-
Bagifj-R lean. If that Pillar then be fha-
ken and overthrown by Scriptural Argu-
ments, the whole ftru&ure will tumble of
courfe.

.Mi n iff. I am very glad that Ton and I do
( in any meafure) agree in our Sentiment* about
this matter \ to let you fee then, how fandy a
Foundation the Anabaptifts build on^ I fiat!
begin to lay down fome Scriptural Arguments r
to prove them moft heterodox and un found in
this point of Abraham's Covenant , wherein they
do moft evidently raft the very Foundation of
Life and Salvation to Abraham himfelf and
all his Seed:

CHAP.

C i )

C H A P. I.

Of God's Covenant with Abraham, wherein
is fiairdy proved, that that Covenant , in Geo.
iji J. k i the Covenant of Grace.

THAT God's Covenant with Jbraham,
1 in Gen. 1-7. 7. was, and ilill is, the
Covenant of Grace, difpenfed in a Church
way : None of the Orthodox ever did: ( or
do) deny, that I can find. That the ta-
king that Covenant in this Senfe, is- the
Foundation Principle, on which all found
Proteftants do maintain and juftifie the
Right of Believers Infants to Baptifm> is
beyond Contradiction.

When the Mcft High and Sovereign
Lord God fa w fit to make known his Will
and Pleafure, to be; that his Covenant of
Grace, ( agreed on, between himfelf, and
his Son Chrilt in Eternity ) Pnould be. Dif-
penfed in an Ecclefiaftical (or Church) way,
he (Ingles out (above all other Men ) Abra-
ham his Friend \ on whom he confers the
Honourable Tide, of the Father, of the
Faithful^ Rom. 4. 11.. Not that Abraham
did v or could ( poffibly ) beget a Believer
fas fuch) or could convey into thQ Chil-
dren he begat (according to Fleihly Gene-

ration )

CO

ration i that noble Grace of Faith, where-
with God's Free Gift had Blelled himfelf.
But God opens arid propounds his ever-
lafting Covenant of Grace and Salvation
to him, as a Puhllck Perfon, who was to
Perfonate all true Believers •/ who (in after
Ages ) were to be Members of his Viiible
Churches, to the fecond coming of Chrift.

The Sum and Snbltance of that 'Cove-
nant, is briefly comprehended in the
Words of Gen. 17. 7. / will efiabtifi my
Covenant between me and thee, and thy Seed
after thee, in their Generations, for an Ever-
lafiing Covenant-, to be a God to thee, and
to thy Seed after thee,

This Covenant hath Two EfTential Parts,
as all Right Covenants have, ( i. ) God's
part, held forth in the- Words, / will be a.

$ God to thee,kc.

The meaning whereof ( according to
the Analogie of Faith, ) mufl be thus u 1-
derftood. Tho' thou Abraham, whom I
now call, to become my Friend and Favo.
rite, and a Publick Head ( or Reprcfenta-.
tive ) of all believing Church Members, to
the end of the World \ be'it an undone and
guilty Sinner, polluted in thy Nature, and

; born under Adam% Covenant of Works \
liable and obnoxious to its Curfe, and to
the Wrath to come \ unable to recover or
help thy felf out of that deplorable Con-
dition,

( 3 5

diton, into which thy natural Birth fas
Adam's Child) hath put thee. And albe-
it, thou be no way worthy of any Favour,
yet I think fit to let thee know , what
Thoughts and Purpofes of Mercy and Kind-
nefs, I have in ftore for thee. Abraham :
And for .the reft of mine El eel:, whom I
have chofen to my felf in Chrift, (the
Promifed Meffiah, ) of whom, that Son
which I have promifed thee, is to be a
Type : And in whofe Perfon , all mine
Elecl, are to be Allegorical! y ( or Typi-
cally ) Reprefented j and that as thy Son
is to be a Type of mine, in whom I have
elected and chofen them.

I frankly and freely pardon and for-
give thee, all thofe Tranfgreffions and
Sins, wherewith, (as Adamh Child) thou
flandeft chargeable, for breaking that Co-
venant of Works I made with Adam, thy
( and all Mankinds) Natural and Federal
Head.

I account thee -perfectly Juil and Righ-
teous in my Sight , not by, eg: foi~, that
Principal ot Inherent Holinefs, which the
Spirit of Grace ( in effectual Calling ) hath
wrought in thee, ( which Inherent Holi-
nefs is (ever) the- Fruit and Effect of a
juftified State -, but never the procuring (or
meriting) Caufe. But I account and e-
fteem thee, as Juft and Righteous, as if

thou

(4)
thou hadft (in thy own Perfon) exa&lfr
performed that legal Righteoufnefs, which
the Law Moral requires ^ on the alone ac -
count of my Son*s Righteoufnefs, which ( as
the Mediator and Surety of this my Co-
venant of Grace } he is to perform in the
behalf of thee, and all mine Elect) I moft
freely impute to thee.

. I fan&ifie and renew thy vitiated and
polluted Nature, by my fanctifying Spirit,
that thou mayeft be capable of Communion
and Fellowfliip with me, both here, in my
Church Militant •, and hereafter, in my
Church Triumphant.

I adopt thee to be my Son, by Grace ^
and by virtue hereof, thou art reftored to
all the Blefllngs, Rights and Privilege's,
which Adam (thy Natural and Federal
Head ) loft and forfeited, by his Apoftacy
and Defection : Hereby thou art admitted
Q as a free Denizon ) into the Family and
Houfhold of God : From whence thou waft
call out ( in Adam ) when he was ejected
and call out for his Rebellion, witnefs his
Expulfion out of Earthly Paradice, a lively
Type of the Heavenly. I promife to efta-
blifh thee in Grace, fo as thou flaalt never
more be in danger of lofing thy felf, or
forfeiting my Love and Favour any more :
For ever I will be a Sun, and a Shield, to
furnilh and fupply thee with all neoeilary

Acconi-

( o

Accommodations for Life in tl^is World ^
I will protect and defend thee from all ad-
verfe Powers, Spiritually and Bodily, which
fhall contrive and feek thy Ruine. And*
finally, I will receive thee into Heaven,
when, by Death, thou goeft hence ; where
thou ftialt Live and Reign, with me, Eter-
nally.

And the very fame Mercy and Favour
which I have now exprefled, and fhewn to
thee, I do oblige my felf, by the Promife
of this my Covenant, that 1 will do to ail
mine Elect, who are to fpring from thy
Loyns. As alfo, to all mine Elect, who
are to come of the Gentile Race, to the end
of the World.

.- (2-) Man's part : As for thee, Ahraham^
this thou muft do, ( on thy part ) thou
muft walk Humbly and Uprightly before
me •, thou mull make the Moral Law (en-
graven by the Finger of my Spirit, on the
Heart of Mam, thy Natural and Federal
Head) the (landing Rule of thy Obedi-
ence, both negatively and pofitively. In
all the parts of thy_ Obedience, thou muft
look exactly to three things: 1. To the
Subject Matter of thy Obedience, let it be
what I -command and require, not what
Creatures devife or enjoin. 2. To the
manner. See that thou do it In Faith,
keeping thine Eye on Chrift (my Son)

for

for Acceptance, and acting all by ftrength
derived from him. 3. To the End. See
that my Glory be that thou aimed at,
3nd defigneft , in all thou goeft about.
Thou (halt not do my Work and Service in a
Mercenary way, as a Servant that Works
for Wages •, but thou mud obey my Com-
mand as a Son, with Freedom of Spirit,
and from a Principle of Love and Grati-
tude , knowing and coniidering, that my
Grace and Love hath made Proviiion of
all that is needful, to make thee (every
way eternally happy, both here and here-
after. The dreadful Curfe, and eternal
Death, to which ( by Sin ) thou hecameft
obnoxious : My Son Chrift ( Typ'd out
by the Ram) haih let thee for ever free
from it. And that by his being made a
Curfe, and undergoing Death for thee ,
( as being thy Sponfor or Surety J at his
Hands 1 have received , the full of that
Debt, whereto thou becameft liable, by
breaking my Law, there remains not the
lean: Mite for thee to pay *, fo that ( now)
thou haft no Caufe to fear my Vindicative
Juftice-, the many and (harp Affii&ions,
wherewith thou malt meet, in thy way to
Glory, (hail be but the gentle Chaftife-
ments, of thy (dearly ) loving, and recon-
ciled Father ? who ( by them ) will purge
out the remains of thy indwelling Cor-

rnp-

(7-)

ruption: and fweetly wean thee trom

the enticing Obje^s of the vain and be-

"witching World thou lived; in. That

Perfect, and Spotiefs Righteoufnefs, which

mutt Recommend thee to k%% and prefent

thee Blamelefs, before, the Throne of my

Glorious Holinefs, in the Third Heaven,

is ( Subjectively J Inherent in the Perfou

of God-Man, thy Mediator and Surety j to

this Mediatorial Righteoufnefs of his, thou

(halt add nothing, neither thy own Perfo-

nal Qualifications; nor yet, the Holinefs

of Saints or Angels y ( as if thereby ) thou

could eft be made more acceptable, than

that Righteoufnefs of his. doth make thee.

Thou ihalt keep my Covenant, both thou

and all thy Eccleiiaftical (or Church ) Seed,

throughout your Generations, till my Son

comes to Judge the World at thelaft Day.

• Thou v and air thy Church Seed, (which

Springs from thee by Fleihly Generation, )

fhall obferve to have all your Males mark'd

with Circumciiion, the viiible Token and

Seal of this my Gracious Covenant, which

I have ( now ) entred into, with thee;

for thy felf ( a (Updating Father, ") and for

all thy Children ^ who are to be the^Mem-

bers of my Son's Mediatorial Kingdom 0 or

Vifible Church on the Earth.

And when Cfrrift my Son fhall come in

the Fieih,3nd fhall enter upon his Mediate-

B nal

(8 )

rial Kingdom, whatever vifible Token or
Seal he (hail appoint to fucceed in the room
of Circumciiion", thy Gentile Church Seed
(as well as Jews, ) who are to believe in
him, (hall ( carefully ) obferveto be Sealed
therewith, both they and their Infants :
And that by Virtue of this my Covenant,
1 now make with thee, for thy felf and
them. And to the end, that neither thou,
nor thy Children (in fucceeding Ages) may
be ignorant of what my Will and Pkafure
is, concerning the Non-Elect, who are to
come and fpringfrom Believing and Holy
Parents, in my vifible Church or Churches,
I notifie to thee, and thy Church Seed after
thee, ( throughout their Generations ) that
my Sovereign Will and Pleafure is, that all
the Infants of my Believing, Profefling
Church Members, fhall be markt with the
viiible Token or Seal, of this my Covenant
in theChurch,whereofthe Profefling Parent
( or Parents) are Members, and that without
any Regard had to the Elect, or Non-Elect.
For, feeing that the Secrets of my Decrees
and Councils are known to my felf alone, I
will that thou, and thy Church Seed after
thee, ( to the end of the World ) do, in
the Judgment of (rational) Charity, judge
all the Seed, and Infant Posterity of my
jojoidling People, who have laid hold on
toy. Covenant, ( by an eternal, viiible Pro-

fcflion )

(9)

feffion ) to belong to the Election, and to
own them for fuch, until they ( by open
Apoftacy, and final Impenitency ) do ma-
nifeft the contrary. For albeit my Viflble
Churches do confiil of Elec% and Non~Elec\
and the one as well as the other do partake
of the Seal of my Covenant, and are Par-
takers of all Church Privilege s , yet none
mall ever partake ( internally and favingly)
of the inward Grace and Mercy -figiiified,
and fealed by the Token and Seal of my
Covenant, (\n the Church Viflble, ^ but
the Eleft only, whofe Names are ( particu-
larly ) Regiftred in the Lamb's Book of
Life. And altho' the Non-Eled m my
Church, do fall fhort of the faving Benefits
of my Covenant of Grace ; yet (hall they
find that I am no way behind with them;
fory altho5 1 ( the abfolute Sovereign of the
World ) be no way obliged to the Creature
(efpecially fallen Bxbels,) yet, feeing it is
my Pleafure to employ the Non-Ekd in
the Service of my Church, ( while it is in a
Militant State) that thofe common Gifts
(of my Spiritj wherewith they are to be
endowed, might be laid out and improved,
for the good and welfare of my Eled and
Chofen ^ I will give them a Place in my
Church, that they fhall be called by my
Name, and fhall have an -equal Right (with
mine Eleft) to the Seal of my Covenant^
B 2 and

C 10 )

and all outward Helps and means of Salva-
tion, in the Church Viiibtej whereby it
fhall plainly appear, fin the Day of Judg-
ment J that their miffing Heaven, and fall-
ing (hort of eternal Life, was of their own
Procurement. Notwithstanding, as is the
Service wherein they are employed in
my Church, 1 will give them a plentiful
Recompence, ( viz.. ) a Temporal Reward,
in Lien of a Temporal Service :, Such as
Bodily Health, Worldly Wealth, Plea-
fures and Honours, &c. which areY every
way) more fuitable to their Spirit, and are
more fought and delighted in ( by them)
than are the things laid up for my Chofen :
Plain Inflances ( hereof) I have feen fit
to leave ow Record, in the Perfons of
IJlimael and Ifaac, both born of Abraham,
( according to the Mem ) the one a Re-
probate, the other Elect j both muft be of
the Church - viilble, and Sealed with the
vifible Token and Seal of God's Covenant
'with Jhr*ham. Of the fame Nature is that
of Efau and Jacob, both born of Jfaac
( according to Flelhly Generation ) yet the
one a Reprobate, and the other ElecV,
both mult be of the viiible Church, and
Sealed with the Seal of the Covenant, and
pafs (currant) for Church Members,
( before Men) until they (themfelves)
make the contrary to appear ; As did Ift>*
r/uui, Efahi &c. ' And

C xi )

And thus, having as plainly and as'
briefly as I- could, (for the Information of
rhofe who are yet ignorant of \Abrahams-
Covenant) explained and (hewn the Sub-
fiance and Tenure of God's Covenant with
i&tfakam, for himfelf and all his Ecclefi-
aftical, er Church Seed ; both Jews and
Gtntiks, to the end of the World.

I ceme now to laxdown_l^je^crijptu_ral
Arguments,' to jrovex that God's Cove -
riant with Abraham, ( as now explained )
is the .Covenant,. of Grace , which God
propounded to Abraham^ in Gen. 1/7. 7.
And -not a Covenant of \Vorkis, as the
Anabaftifls teach it is.

That it is the Covenant of Grace, and no
other,will evidently appear to any,who look
notafquint on the Arguments following.

Arg. 1 , The frrfb Argument is this. If <
.God never yet made a Covenant of Works,!
with any ( meet. ) Man, but that which hej
made with finlefs Adam ( the Natural and!
Federal.' Head of all Mankind ) in the State!
oflnnocency, before the Fall : Then God 's-i
Covenant with Ahrahmn is the Covenant!
of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works.!
But God never ( yet ) made a Covenant!
of Works, with any meet Man, but that!
which he made with ilnlefs Adam^ f the!
natural and Federal" Head of all. Mankinds i
ill the State of Innocency, before the::
B 1 Fall1

Fall : Therefore, God's Covenant with
Abraham^ in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant
of Grace, and no other. Plain it is, and
aone (without Lying againflGod) can
deny it, that God made a Covenant of
Works with Adam, and in him with all
Mankind.

The Condition whereof was, do and
live ; fin and die. And as plain it is,
that Adam fell, by tranfgreOIng that Co-
venant *, by which Fall -he loft the BleiTed
Image of God to himfelf, and all his Poft€-
r.ly, whereby he and his Pofterlty became
utterly vmcapable of Life and Salvation by
that Covenant.

Ndw, Abraham being (by natural Birth )
a Son of the fir ft Adam,, and ( as fuch ) born
under the Curfe of Adam\ Covenant, and
Partaker of a fulfill and polluted Nature •
which rendrcd him as uncapable of per-
forming any Work, which ( as a Conditi-
on.) can anfwer the Laws Demand ^ as a
Man naturally dead, is uncapable of railing
or quickening himfelf-, or as a Sparrow is
uncapable to remove, or carry on its Back,
the greateft Mountain in the World. To
what end fbould the only wife God make
z Covenant of Works, with fuch a fallen
Sinner ?

Arg. 2. If to hold and teach, that God's
Covenant with Abraham^ ( in Gen. 17. 7. )

is

is a Covenant of Works, and not a Cove-
nant of Grace, be a high Reflection on God,
and alfo deftru&ive . to the Souls of Men \
then is God's Covenant with Abraham
( in Cm. 17. 7. ) the Covenant of Grace,
and not a Covenant of Works. But to
hold and teach, that God's Covenant
with Abraham, (in Gen. 17. 7. ) is a Co-
venant of Works, and not a Covenant of
Grace, is a high Reflection on God, and
deftru&ive to the Souls of Men.

Therefore, Gods Covenant with J>-
braham, (c?e« 17. 7. ) is the Covenant of
Grace, and not a Covenant of Works.

For rendring this Argument unan-
fwerable, Two things want Confirmation. ■■■
Ffyfiy That to holdWl teach, that GodV
Covenant with Jkr-dham% a Covenant of
Works, is a high R<fie9io;n on God. And^
Srcohdlj, That the lame is deiiruttivc -to--'
the Souls of Men.

The.Hr/? of thefe will evidently ap-
pear, to the unprejudie'd and impartial'
- Reader, if he (feriouiTy ) confider how In-
confident it is, with the Divine Attributes ■
of God, to make a Covenant of Works,
with a Lapfed, Polluted Sinner, whom he '
knows to be ( altogether ) Dead in Tref-
pafles and Sins, and ( every way ) as iir?*-
able to will r or ; dorany Work that is-

C ?4 )
f Spiritually ) good, as a Dead Man is able
to qmcketi and raife himfelf.

For flluftration fake, let it be confider-
edj how unbecoming a Wife and Prudent
Man it would re, tcTftrike a Covenant (or
Bargain) for left} or twenty thoufand
Founds, with an infolvent Perfon, who is
well kaovvn not to be worth ten Farthings in
the World , 2nd ( which is yet worfe) who
hath neither Wit to contrive, nor Health or
Limbs to work to get a Penny towards
r-V-g &eb a V2^ Sum. 1 cannot lb much
as doubt of any (worldly wife) Man's Un-
wilUngiitfs to be guilty offuch an overfight
as this : And [hall the-( Unerringly ) Wile
God, be guilty of So great an Abfurdity ?

Stcovdku As this Principle Reflects on
God • fo it is Definitive to the "Souls of
Men. This appears (beyond all Contradicti-
on, ) in that'll: raieth the very Foundation
of Mens ^akation : by denying that 06-
fenafil to be a Covenant of Grace, -which
yiprtihate a-d Ifaac^vAih Jacob , and all
the Old Tcfiamcnt Believers depended on
for cternai Salvation : and by which, ws
(Gentile Believers ) hope to go to Hea-
ven. For, moll plain it is, that by this
perni ious Principle, Abraham is loll, with
all who died nulling to the Grace exhibi-
ted in that Covenant. And if Abraham
C the Father of the Faithful ) be trott-
ing

tif)

ing to a Covenant of Works ; I can-
no^ fee, how any of his Ecclefiaftica!
Church Seed can be Saved, any more than
he is, For, by a Covenant of Works,
no meer Man ever was, or fhall be jufti-
fied and -faved,

Arg. 3. If the Scripture no where (ei-
ther directly or by Gonfequence ) calls-
God's Covenant with Abraham, {Gen. 17.7
7. ) a Covenant of Works- •, then it is a Co-*
venant of -Grace, and not a Covenant * of-
Works.' But the Scripture no where ( ei~ - .
fhef. dire&ly or by confequence, ) cafe-*
God's Covenant wklv Abraham, a. Cove-
nant of Works : Therefore the Covenant-
of God with ^brahamj is the Covenant-
of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works.

If it cannot be clemonftrated from the-
written Word, or by Arguments deduei-'
ble therefrom, that Abraham!** Covenant,/*
@eh% 17. 7. is called, for' can be proved )
a Covenant of Works ; They who fo hold.
and teady will be found ranked among
thofe who call Good, Evil ^ and Evil0
Good ; and who put Light for Darknejs^ -
a?id Darknefs for Light , ifa. ). io. For •■'
Men to take on them , to term Abraham?*^
Covenant a Covenant of Works, withoiii;
any Warrant Divine, is (to me) an Argi> -
ment of an ignGrant,raih^nd-prefumptiK}^3-
Splat.: frora- which Charge., let fuel* Meri

fee kow they can acquit and" free them-
felves.

and not by Works \ then the Covenant

vvhiclrGod madejvkJiJiuTi, is the Co venant
OrGracc7and iiotj)f_Works, But Abra-
ham was jollified by Faith, and not by
Woi ks :y Therefore the Covenant which
£?od made with him , is the Covenant o£
Grace, and not the Covenant of Works.
That Abraham was juftified by Faith, and
mi by Works, the Scripture is exprefs and:
dear, Rom. 4, 2,3, 4. Gal 2. 5, 6, 7.

Arg. 5. If God hath made no other
Covenant of Grace with Abraham, di-
Sinft from that in Gen. 1.7. 7. then, that
Covenant in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of
Grace:, but God made no Covenant of
Grace, with Abraham, diftinft from that
in Gen. 17. 7. Therefore that Covenant
in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of Grace,
and not the Covenant of Works.

That which will determine the Point in
Gbritroveriie, is this, let thofe who (herein^
oppofe me, lay down a Scriptural Definition
of the Covenant of Grace ; and that in fuch
Terms, as bell pleafe themfelves 5 and in.
Cafe, their own Definition, do not agree (at
leair for SubHancej with Gen,, 17: 7. if it be
according- to God's Word, then am I freely
rcjjiliag XX ovva my. fdf ( hereia J miftaken :

C*7 ' )
If they fefu'fe to' comply with fo fair a Pro-'
pofal, let the judicious and impartial Reader
judge, who is at the Lofs (herein) they or I ?

I conclude this Chapter with this Drlem- -
ma, ( viz. ) Abraham, ( the Father of the •
Faithful ) he is either fav'd, or eife he is -
damn'd • one of thefe two the Ad verfa-
ries ( I now oppofe ) mull grant ; for there t
is no middle State for the Souls departed.
"If they fay he is damn'd, then, there is :
no Ground left us to hope^ that any of A~~-
dam\ Poflerity ever were or.fhall be fav'd ; ;
for we have no other Covenant whereby to-
-expedt 'Salvation,, but that of Abraham : ■■
.And if he Perifhed . under that Covenant,-.
fo mud we.

if they grant, that Graham is in a State "
of Salvation, (as they mud, if they ipeakr
by the Spirit of Ch rift ) then Abraham was' -
juftified and laved by a Covenant of Grace,
and if by a Covenant, of Grace, thenahan -
Covenant, mention'd in Gen, 17. 7. xnuit "
needs be the Covenant of Grace ^ for be—
fides that Covenant tBefc Scriptures know ••?
no other. '

Againfl what T have Said^ ('and all Or- •
thodox Protefbants conflantly hold and at- -
firm ) concerning Abrakamh Covenant be--
isig a Covenant of pure and abfolrte-Gra.ee \ \
this is .objeftcd by. the Mverfaries, ■-

C is )

Object. The Land of Canaan wot a Tem-
poral Bleffing • therefore fk~ch was the Cove-
v ant , of ir hie h Circmncijlon wai a Tempera-
ry Seal,

I anfwer in two Particulars. Firit, The

Promife of the Land of Canaan is no Ellen-
tial part of the Covenant oi Abraham. Let
the "Words in the fth Verfe be Read with-
out Prejudice. The lail Claufe of the Verfe
doth fully comprehend the Sum and Sub-
ihnce of the Covenant of Grace made with
Abraham. The Promife of the Land of
Vandrn is only by way of Addition or O-
vcrplus No Eflential part of the Cove-
nant it felt. The Covenant is briefly com-
prehended in thefe Words, 1 will be a God
to thee ^ and to thy Seed after thee : For in
thefe Words God engages himfelf ( by free
and abiblute Promife ) to Abraham and to
ffis Eiecl Church-Seed, that he will be a
God to him and them, to do all things
for -them -which are needful to compleat
eir Happinefs, both here and hereafter.
Secondly^ The Land of Canaan was pro-
ofed not as it was any EfTentisl part of
Covenant of Grace :, or, as if real Blef-
vednefs cod lifted in the actual Enjoyment
thereof: But as the fame was a Tempora-
ry pe oi Heaven. And for wrant of Un-
ilcrftandihg and coniidering this very
thijo^ many, who have thought thcmlelvts

in ife*

C 19)

wifer (ha the Myfteries of the Gofpel ) than
their Neighbours, have prov'd themfelves
ftiort of true Wifdoiii \ in this Particular
atleaft.

To convince of this Miftake, let that of
our Saviour(in/I^tf. 6. 33. Bntfeelyefirft the
Kingdom of God^ and the Righteoufnefs thereof^
and all thefc things Jhall be added to yon ) be
weighed in the Ballance of an unprejudiced
Confideration, and to an impartial Eye that
looks not afquint at thefe two places of ho-
ly Scripture, Gen. 17. 7. and Mat. 6. 33. it
will moil plainly" appear, that Temporal
Bleffings are held forth in one, as well as in
"die other. And if it muft needs be granted,
that becaufe God made the Promife of the
Land of Canaan to Abrahamy &c. that
therefore God's Covenant with him and
hisv was a Covenant of Works : It will as
neceflarily follow, that Believers, to whom
Chrift direcls his Speech in Mat. 6, 35.
are now under a Covenant of Works as
well as Abraham was. And fb, neither
Abraham (the Father of the Faithful) nor
any of his Seed, (the Eleft I mean ) either
of the jewijli or Gentile Race^ are like to
be laved or enjoy God for their Portion.
And by this way of arguing, it will evi-
dently appear to any feeing Man, (who
fhuts not his Eyes for fear of being con-
vinced ) that while theAdverfaries (I now

oppofe

( io )
oppofe in this Controverfle) were employ-
| ed in deviling this Shift to prove God's
| Covenant ( with Abraham ) to be a Cove-
; nant of Works j and that (on purpofe )
1*0 exclude poor Infants from that Cove-
nant, and from Baptimr (the now Seal
thereof,) they have ("in fenfibly) Ihurboth
Abraham and thenijelyesioo out from be-
ing fayed : and what Advantage will (here-
by )accrew to their Caufe,let it be improved
to the utmoih

Objeft. 2. It is again Ob jetted, If the Co-
venant in Gen. 1 7. 7. 7 be a Covenant of pure
Grace, and not a Covenant of ~ Works , and that
all Abraham's Children be alike interefted
therein, then doth Grace come by natural Gene- -
ration ^.contrary both to Scripture and Reafon.

Anjw. The ground of the Ohje&or's Mi- -
ftake lies iii> two things: Firft^ his not
diftinguifning or confidering, that the Chil-
dren of Believing Abraham, are fa id to be
m Covenant two Ways, or in. a twofold !
Refped : Firs!, Internally, by Virtue of
God's Ele&ion : And thus none are (ore-
ver fhall be ) in Covenant, but Abraham's
Seed, (i'k.. ) The Elect, who are in Scrip-
ture (by way of Diftin&ion) ftyled, the
Children of Promife, Typ'd out in the Per-
fon of ' Ifaac,GaL 4. 28.

Thefe ( and they alone ) partake in. the^
faving Benefits of the Covenant \ and have .

C 11 J

alfo a Right to the vifible Sign or Seal of
the Covenant hi the Vifible Churches of
Chrift, under the Gofpel Difpenfation. *
Secondly, Externally, by Virtue of the
External Profeflion made in the Church .•
£nd thus the Non-Ele&fas well as the E-
led) are faid to: be in Covenant with God,
in his Churches Vifible, ( here on Earth. )
Thefe albeit, they never partake in, the
faving Bleffings of the Covenant ^ yet by
Virtue of the External Profeflion made,they
and their Infant Seed, (though not Eled, )
have an External Right (in the Church Vi-
fible ) to the Token (or Seal J of Abraham's
Covenant ; and to-all other Privileges and
Ordinances in the Church, whereof they
are capable, according to the Revealed
Will of God: By Virtue hereof it is, that
God calls fuch his People- and he will have
his Church to call and own them for fuch
too, until they manifeft themfelves to be
otherwife •, and that by a voluntary Defe-
ction, and final Apoftacy. Plain Inftances
hereof are ( Graphically} fet down in God's
Word, in the Perfons of Ijhmael and Efaur
( in w:hofe Perfons the Reprobate Seed of
Abraham were ( AHegoricalJy) typ'd out as
the Ek&Seed } were Megorically and Ty-
pically represented in the Perfons of Jfaac
and Jacob '<\- The. former of thefe fprang
fronUhe V&faQl Abrab$mr_z% well as the

latter ;

C ^^)

- latter : And on this Account they had a
place in the Vitlble Church, and were mark-
ed with the Seal of God's Covenant, as
well as the latter. They -were efleemed
and reckoned as God's Children, and true
Members of the Church,, .until ( by Defecti-
on and Apoilacy, ) they difcovered them'
felves to be otherwife. If this Diftinttion
be not allowed, I cannot fee how God can
be ( orderly > Worfhipt by any Vilible-
Church on Earth.

This is the Sum and Subftance-of God's
Covenant, made with Abraham in Gen. 17.
7. and with his Elecl Seed, err. And by
Virtue of this Promife, sJbrahamznd ( with
him ) all his Elect Seed would have been
moil Happy and eternally BLeft, had no
Promife been made of the Land of Canaan.
So ( in like manner,) (hall all true Believers,
with their Ele& Seed, be eternally Happy
and Bleft, being made Partakers of the
Righteoufnefs of Chrift, (intended in Mat.
6. 33.) Albeit fuch Believers (and their E-
lecl: Seed) mould ( with Ltzartis ) Die on a
Dunghil, for want of thofe Temporal Blef*
fmgs held forth by Chrift, in the above-
mentioned Promife, which plainly demon-
ftrates,.. that the Promife which God made
to Abraham, of giving to him and to his
Seed, the Land of Canaan, was no more
an Eilential part of the Covenant in.

with

C *j )

with him and his Seed, than the Promife
held forth by Chrift, In the place (above-
named ) proves, that Believers and their
Eled Seed are ( now ) under a Covenant of
Works. All the Difference which I can
find between thefe two places, isv that the
Promife in Gen. 17. 7. was Typical of the
Kingdom of Heavea. The other is not fb.
Were this Covenant of God made with A-
hraham ( the Father of the Faithful ) as^he
was a Stipulating and a Covenanting Re-
prefentative ( in a Church. Vifible, ) but
-rightly understood, and -heliev'd with Ap-
plication to Mens own Souls, I am per-
fwaded there would be neither Anahajtifis.
nor Armlmans in the World.

The Church of Rome holds and teaches,
that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion .*
Iain, not afhamed to fay, it is the Mother
of all Errors in Religion. Neither am I
afraid to affirm it to.be both the Mother
and Nurfe of Anabaftijm and Arminia-
nijm.

CHAP. II.

Troving that Circumcifion was a Seal of God's
Covenant of Grace, made with Abraham,
and- his Seed.

Arg. i.TpIther Circumcifion was the ex-
V j ternal Token (or Seal; of Abra-

ham's

Cm)

ham's Covenant (of Grace)mentioned, G. 1 7.

7. Or elfe that Covenant had no Seal at all.

The Ad verfary cannot avoid here, He

nraft either grant or deny 5 if he? grant

thaJLCircunxcilloiiwas utheSeal of Abraham's

Covenant, Ihaye what I vvas to prove-, if

i he deny iuobe the Seal of that Covenant,

) then it lieiat_his Door to demonftrate what

-j was the Seal of that Covenant : If he fay

that that Covenant hadTnoTeal at all, He

will (thereby; not only gainfay the Word

of God, but alfo fpeak againfl: Reafon \ for

all Men know it is an_eflential Propertyj>f

a_ .Cpyenant_tq_have a S_eal, to confirm the

Matter contained in the Covenant.

Arg. 2. If Circumcifion is by (God
himfeif ) called the Seal of the Covenant,
then is it ( beyond all Controverfie ) the
Seal of the Covenant.

But Circumcifion is (by Gcd himfeif)
called the Seal of the Covenant.

Therefore Circumcifion is (beyond all
Controverfie) the Seal of the Covenant. For
Proof of the Argument, compare Atts 7. 8.
with Gen. 17. 10. To Which I will only
add, Rom. 4. 11. which will put the mat-
ter (in Difpute) beyond the reach of all
Difpnte. The Words are plain and ex-
press, in calling Circumcifion the Seal of
the Righteoufnefs of Faith •, which plainly
groves two things. Firft, That Circum-

.tifion

ciflon is a Seal of the Covenant made with
Abraham. Secondly, That the Covenant
of which Circumcifion was the Seal, was
the Covenant of Grace, and no other.

CHAP. III.

That Water Baptifm, fncceeded, or came in
the room of Circtim,cifion, ( under the Gof-
pel Difpenfathn ) I prove by three con'
vincing Arguments.

A*, i. XF there be no other Initiato-
J[ ry Seal appointed by Chrift
under the Gofpel but Water-Baptifm, then
is Water-Baptifm come ( or facceeded ) in
the room of Circumcifion, to be the initia-
ting Seal under the Gofpel : But there is no
other initiatory Seal appointed by Chrifl:
under the Gofpel, but Water-Baptifm.

Therefore Water-Baptifm is come or
fucceeded in the room of Circumcifion, to
be the initiatory Seal under the Gofpel.

The Truth and Strength of this Argu-
ment will the more clearly appear, by duly
considering, that Circumciiion was (under
the dark Difpenfation of the Law,) the ini-
tiating Seal of the Covenant, which will
not, cannot be denied, unlefs by Men who
underfland (or care ) not what they fay ^
That Water-Baptifm is, ( and mult be) fo

now;

now \ muft'fof neceffity) be acknowledged
by all who own that the Lord VSupper fhc-
ceededy or came in. the room of the Baf-
fover.

I humbly conceive no wife Man will op-
pofe me, in faying, that the Churches of the
New-Teitament have as great need of an
initiating Seal of the Covenant of Grace, as
had the Church of the Jews under the Old :
And if Baptifm be not that Seal, I know
not what is; for that Circumcifion is (now)
abro^ted-and abolifhed yjnflef the Gofpel,
none can deny • and that fome other viiible
Sign mult futceed (or come) in Its r6om,
lgult be granted by them who acknowledge
that the Lord's Supper jucceeded:(or came )
in the room ofThe Paflbvcr.
■ A$g* 2, If the Adverfaries themfelves
do (practically ) own Baptifm to be the ini-
tiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant, then
Baptifm is the initiating Seal of the Gofpel
Covenant: But the Adverfaries tbemfelves
do ( practically) own Baptifm to be the ini-
tiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant. There-
fore Baptifm is the - initiating Seal of the
Gofpel Covenant.

Thofe I (here ) difpute againft, before
they can overthrow this Argument, mall
abandon their own Practice in making Bap-
tifm by Dipping, the Door of Entrance in-
to their Churches;, by which Practice they

unchurch

C *7 )

unchurch all. other Churches who are not
of their own Perfvvafion. It is well known
in London, and elfewhere, where Aaabay
nfm is prac~tifed, that they make Baptifm
(by Dipping ) the Form of a right Gofpel
Church • on which account it is they refufe
Communion { in the Lord's-Supper ) with
the moft fan&ified Believers, if they ate not
Dipt after their Mode.

'Tis true, that fome of that Perfwaflon
would feem more moderate and charitable
than others, (of that way J While they make
Saintfhip the ( only ) term of Church Com-
munion : Thefe feem not to lay fuch flrefs
on Baptifm as the reft of that Perfwaflon
do , they will admit to the Lord's-Supper
( with them ) thofe of other Perfwafions,
though not Baptized in their way • but how
fuch will be able to juftifie_their Pra&ice in
; admitting Unbaptized Perfons to the Lord's
- Suj^per^ I cannot underltand \ to me it isi
plain that there is the fame Parity of Reafbn
for keeping hack an unbaptized Perfon from]
the Lord's-Table, as there was for keeping
back an uncircumcifed Perfon from the Paf-
fover of Old. The firfl of thefe ( viz.. )
: Baptifm, is the yifible Badge of our Union
\ (with Chriil) in Regeneration, ( as Circum-
cifion was to the Believing Jews) The other
(i^.)the LordVSupper,is the vifible Badge
of our Communion and Fellowihip with

Chrift,

<x8 )

Chrift, as the Paflbver (of old) was to the
Believing Circumcifed Jews: Now, as
Communion is a Fruit of Union, and fol-
lows after it, fo no Perfon ougkt to be ad-
mitted to the fecond, that is not ( a&ually)
a vifible Partaker of the firft It is not to
be doubted, that thefe who (in Charity ) in-
vite us to the Lord's Table (with them) do
account us as Unbaptized Perfons, while
they reckon our Baptifm ( received in In*
fancy, and by Sprinkling ) but a meer nulli-
ty, that is, no Baptifm at all.

Arg. 3. If Water Baptifm have the
fame end and ufe afligned it by God, as
Circumcilion had of old, viz* to fignifie
and feal to Believers and their Infants E-
le&, the Truth of their Regeneration, &c.
Then Water-Baptifm hath fucceeded in
the room of Circumcifion. But Water-
Baptifm hath the fame end and ufe afllgn'd
it by God, as Circumcifion had of old ,(?//£..)
to fignifie, and feal to Believers f and their
Elett Infants, ) the Truth of their Regene-
ration, &c. Therefore, Water-Baptifm
hath fucceeded, in the room of Circumci-
fion.

This Argument depends on the right
and genuine Explication of that Text in
Colof. 2. 11. In whom alfo ye are Circum-
cifed^ with the Circumcifion made without
Hands ^ in putting off the Body of the Sins oj

the

C *9 )

the Flefi, by the Circumcifion of Chrifr
Buried with him in Baptifm, wherein Jfo
you are rifen with him, through the Faith
of the Operation of Cod, who hath raifedhim
from the Dead. J>

' I fliail not here meddle with explaining
this, becaufe, I lhall have occaflon to fpeak
to it when I come to anfwer the Objecti-
ons brought againft Baptifm being come in
the room of Circumciflon .- whereto I re-
fer my Reader.

Againft what hath been faid, concerning
Circumcifion being the Seal of the Cove-

MSvAGiacCi &c' k is obJ^ thus.

Object Circumcifion wa* only a Seal of a
Temporal, Carnal Covenant, Sealing only

W^m °mion> l anfwer in

i. I have already proved, that God's
Covenant with Abraham, ( of which Cir-
cumcifion was the Seal ) was (and ftill is )

n ,7^^ of Grace> and n<* a Cove-
nant of Works, as fome ignorant and in-
jud.dous Teachers woukftain have it I
.be : and that (meerly) on the Account

Zhirl ,flag ,P°°r Infants frora BaP»»V

wh.cn they know could never be iuftified

(by God's Word) Ihonld they judiciously'

acknowledge, that -0™Ws Covenant

Is the Covenant of Grace ; and that Cit>
cumtifion, was the Seal thereof: and that
Water-Baptifm, is ( now ) come in the
room thereof.

2. In that fome have reflefted on that
Covenant, calling it a carnal Covenant of
Works, and the Church which was to ob-
ferve and pra&ife Circumcifion ( the Seal
thereof) a carnal Church : all I need to fay
( by way of Reply ) is, to bewail the Car-
nallity of their llncircumcifed Hearts and
Lips ^ who have no better or higher Ap-
prehenfions of God's Holy Covenant, ( the
Grace whereof mud bring them to Heaven
if ever they come thither, ) and of his fo
highly honoured Friends, Abraham, Ifaac,
and Jacobs with all the reft of the Holy
Patriarchs, Prophets, and godly Believers
of that Day •, than to call it a carnal Cove-
nant, and them a carnal Church.

3. If Abrahams Covenant, was a Co-
venant of Works to him and his Chil-
dren, then it mull ( needs ) be fo to us
Gentile Believers, and to our Children
now.

And iffo, let the Adverfary demonftrate
(if he can) how Abraham, or any of that
carnal Church ( as they falfly term it )
can be fr.ppofed, to be ( now ) in a faved
State : Or, what Ground of Hope we
Gentile Believers' ( and our Children)

have,

C 3t )
have, that we or any of purs fl-ajl £o tol

Heaven when" we die, feeing that we are)
fffir under the very fame Covenant witrt(
Abraham^ which Covenant, if it be a Co-
venant of Work^, and not of Grace, no
Salvation can be expected ; and if th^ Be- •
lievers (under that dark Difpenfation) were
carnal/and not fpiritual,'how comes the
unerring Wjfdom of God to propound

. them to Believers under the Gofpelr for Ex-
amples and Patterns of Faith, Patience, &r.
Heb. 1 1.„ Heb. 12. 1 Jam. 5. 10. Xet it be
farther ^conlidered, that, albeit, the Sea]
of Circumciiion fealed no laving BlefnV ;s

'to the Non-Elect', it doth not hence 'fol-
low, that it fealed no other than Terr
ral Bleffings to" the Eledr, feeing, that {-ta
them) the Heavenly were ( Typically')'
ciudedin the Earthly.

oAs touching the earthly Bleffings, lib}
Circumcjdon fealed to the NomEleci tl

-were greater and better than God wa?>a,'i I

way) obliged to give them. I am |1

than they( favingly ) improved.
> ObjecT - We ■ utterly Aehyj that. Water • Br

fifm dfdjucceed and come ifc the room of C .

cumcifion. -

Aaf-w. For Confirmation of th^Af: >

tive, let the three Arguments alread

-down under this Head, be feriouil-

without Prejudice, ccmildeml", to 4 -••' -

& )

I will only add the Explication oiColof i.
ii, 12. whereon I have grounded a fourth
Argument, to prove that Water- Baptifrri
fhcceeded and came in the room of Circum-
cifion. In the place above quoted, the
Apoftle plainly lets forth to the believing
-Cviojfuws, ( and in them to all believing Cm-
i fcf,to the World's End ) two things, (ne-
ceflary to be known and believed by all true
Believers.)

Flrfij That they, who, by a true lively
Faith, have embraced the Lord Jefus Chrift,
( as held forth in the Gofpel,) evidencing
their Faith by the Truth of Gofpel San-
£\i location : They, and none elfe, who are
Adult, are made a&ual Partakers of the true
and faving Circumcifion, effected in the
-Soul by the Spirit of Ch rift. And which
was (externally) flgnifkd by the outward
Circumcifion.

Thcfe Believers having ( now ) obtained
•the Spiritual Circumcifion, are not at all
to be concerned or Troubled, that they
are not outwardly Circumeifed with the
Circumcifion made with Man's Hands.
Forafmuch as that which was ( Externally )
fignified and fealed to the believing Jews,
4)y the outward Circumcifion, is ( now In-
ternally and Powerfully) wrought in their
Hearts by the Spirit of the Lord Jefuc
thrift.

Secondly i

C r, )

Secondly i The Apoftle fets forth in this
place, that Water-Baptifm is inftituted
and appointed by Chrift ( under the Gof-
pel Difpenfation) to be (to believing Gefc
tiles) the fame that Circuracifi on was to
the J'ewsj viz... A Vilible Sign and Seal
of jibraham\ Covenant to all his Ecckfia-
ftical Church-Seed among the Gentiles,
viz.. All of that Race, who (on God's
calling them ) believe in and obey the
Lord Jefus Chrift. To thefe and their In-
fant-Seed ( and none elfe among the Gen-
tiles ) Baptifm doth ( now under the Gof-
peJ ) fignifie and feal the very fame fpiritu-
al BleiTings and Church Privileges, which
Circumciiion (of old ) did fignifie and feal
to the believing Jews and their Infant-Seed^.

This I take to be the Senfe and Meaning
v of the Apoftle, in that fo much controver-
ted place. In this Senfe, I hope, I [hail die
fatisfied. And herein, I humbly conceive^
■none of "the Orthodox will differ from me^
which Senfe being granted, it is beyond
the reach of all Scriptural Contradiction,
that Water-Baptifm was Inftituted and
appointed (by Chrift J on purpofe to mc-
ceed in the room of Gircumclfion*

C 2 CHAP

C m)

CHAP. IV.

Shewing and f roiling that the Infants of Be-
lieving Gentiles (?7ow under, the G off el)
have as real a Right to the Covenant of
Grace, and to Baptifm7 the ( now ) Vifible
Sign and Seal 'thereof: as had the Children
of Abraham ( according to the Flefi ) to it7
and to Circumcifion, the then Seal of the
Covenant of Grace- '

And, that they are as capable of the Grace
and outward Seal of the Covenant, as are
the mo ft Adult grown Believers.

J fli all lay down Four Arguments^ to evince
and make good ( again ft all Oppofition )what
J now ajfert.

jircr. i.rpH E "iirft Argument* is thus
X fram'd : If God (hirnfelf ) did,
by abiolute Soveraign Grace, comprehend
sibraharrh Church-Seed in the Covenant of
Grace he made with believing Abraham ,
( their Stipulating and Covenanting Father )
and never fince Repeal'd that .Gracious
of tite : Then the Infants of Abraham's
Ct \ are (till interefled in the (

venswt of Grace, and have as great Right
to and are as capable of the Grate and Seal
of -that Covenant as ever.,

but God (hirnfelf) did by abfolute 5o-
Grace, comprehend 'JSh

Church-

i 35 )
Church-Seed in the Covenant of Grace
he made with believing Abr^ham^ \ their

Stipulating and Covenanting Father' which*
Gracious Act of his was never ilacc Re-
pealed. " m

Therefore the Infants of 'jffirah
•Church-Seed are {till interefred m the Co-
venant of Grace, and have as great a Right
to, and are as capable of the Grace and Seal.
of that Covenant as ever.

I cannot fee how this. Argument can
poflibly be overthrown., but by pro
that God did alter and change that Cove-
nant he made with Abraham ( his Friend )
for himfelf and for his Church -See..; ;
which, when the Adverfarv dolj ' £ :■
dence of Scripture, ■( not . ' . a : par -
verted^) I (hall then yeijd the Cauie5 and
bewail , my Mifiake. But two' things caure
in; me an unfhaken. Confidence, that d-,s
can never be done. Ftrft^ The Immutabi-
lity aad Unchangeablenefs of God.^ on
which very account he is ft lied a Covenant-
keeping Giod, who never yet call oaf any
poor "Sinner,, until that Sinner did fir ft adiw
ally caft God ofF^ the which, I think, the
Adverfarv dares not deny. Secd?idly, The
.Impolfib.iiityof poor Infants actually caft-
ing~God off,, and. that beeaufe of their Inca-
pacity in refpect of Age.

C3 Arg

( 30

j&g. i. if Infants be at all faved r they
r,re faved by the Grace of God's Covenant
made mthJhrSham , which Covenant, and
the External Seal thereof, ( in the Vifible

rch mart belong to t#em alfo.
* But Infants are faved by the Grace of
i's Covenant, (made Wixh^braham) and
^ other way. •
jreforc the Covenant of God's Grace

y Which they are faved) and the Seal
thereof, ( in the Vifible Church ) jmifl: be-
long to them al fb

This Argument hath been conftantly
inaiatainecu by the Orthodox ) againlt the
Enemies of Infant Baptifm, with iiicb Suc-
cefs, that I never yet heard the Man's
Kame, who was ^hie to anfwer or over-
Throw tho. fams^by found or folicf Argu-
ment.

To deny Salvation to Infants is a Prin-
ciple fo njonilroiiily cruel and uncharita-
ble, (expoiiog to the Judgment of God,
and to the deferved Frowns of all Tender-
hearted Parents) that fome, who account
it a point of great Skill and Wifdom, ( in
the Myftery of the Gofpel ) to decry and
witnefs againfl Infant Baptifm, have de-
clared themfelves jlrongly inclin'd to be-
lieve, that all Infants are faved, and that
vvitnout difringuifhing between ElecT: and

probate, or between the Seed of Pro-

fefline

( V )
felling Godly Believers, and that of Mako-
met an s^ &c. A Principle ( altogether j as
fifty and groimdlefs as that of denying the
Right "of Believers Infant-Seed to the Co-
venant of Grace, and the Vifible Token or
Seal thereof in the Church, And at whan
Door this ( Heterodox ) Dream fhould en-
ter, or from what Root or Principle it
fhp.uld fpring, I know riot, unlefs from fehafc
Popilh Arminian Principle of general Re-
demption and univerfaT Grace. Here, by
the Conceffion ; or Grant ) of the very Ad-
verfaries, Infants are faved *, but 'how, or
in what way ? whether by a Covenant or
without a Coveiwnt. Here they are ( pro-
roundly j filent, not daring to mention any
Co vena n t a t all , fearing a n Ad v a ntage ma y
be (thereby ) given to dlfcbver or prove
the Right of Infants to the Covenant. It
is fufficierit ; fvich Dreamers judge) to leave
poor Infants to the -general Mercy and
Grace of. God, as thofe' do, who dream
and conceit, that the very Damned in
Hell mall, atlength, be delivered from the
"Torments of that Place, For which Chy-
tnerical Wftym, there is as much to be
faid (from the Word of God, ) as there
is to prove, that God will extend the
Grace of his Covenant to ail Infants dy-
ing fo.

C $ Xht

(38)

The Adverfary I difpute againft, knows
well, that_fhould it be granted ( in
'7\r minis) in plain Terms, that Infants are
tared by the Grace of , the_jCovg5aiit7Tt
id" way be avokled, but tha^InfaDts
foiaJf be rn that Covenant, and mull: have
an indifpntable R\^hi.( i-r faro Ecclsfu) to
the outward Seal thereof.

But this mull be denied, and its contra-
cted, ;'for the moil glorious Gofpel-.
Truth,') vjz.. That Believers only fex-

.

their Infants) are interefted in the

Covenant, and have a Right to the Seal

thereof:, and that in the Right of the Pro-

on they make before Men.

Now, how abfurd and contrary- to the

Tenure and Deftgn of God's Covenant
vn:h thrift (in the behalf of the Ele&j this
Prhicitle of - Anahaytifm is •, I leave to eve-
ry unprejudiced Reader (who underitands
any thing in Religion ) to Judge. And
whether to reft rain the, Promife" of God's
Covenant ( which equally extends to all the
BlccT ) to. that part of the Elec% which are
adult and grown up, to make a ProfeRi>
on, and to extend the Grace of God be-
yond the Bounds of his own Covenant, be
riot equally to rafe the Foundation of Gof-
pel-Truth, and to nfurp the Throne of
God (or to invade his Prerogative) in the

_hj I leave to Wife Men to deter-
mine. If

( 39 > ;

If thus to do falls not uncler that dread-
ful Commination ( or Woe threatned ) i&
Rev, 22. 1 3. I am greatly miftaken,

Arg. i i If Infants do Hand in, as real need
of the Grace of :God's Covenant as the A-
dult do, and be (every way) as capable
thereof as the Adult are, then mud they
of neceffity be allow'd the Seal -thereof
in the. Church,

Bu t Infants do iland in. as real need.of the
Grace of God's Covenant, and are ( every
, way) as capable thereof as the Adult are/

Therefore the Seal of God's Covenant
in the Church mull of neceffity be. allow'd
them.

' That' Infants- are Partakers of Adam\

Guilt/and alfo. of that Pravky and Pollu-.

; tion of Nature, which came by Adam\ Fall,.

I am confident will be deny'd by none]; un~

Tefsby downright Dreamers } now to own

' this.

And at the Tame time to teach and hold y

that Infants are becaufenot grown up to

thernfe of .Reafon and adual Faith ) unca-

' pahle of Regeneration, is to deny Salvation

to all Infants,' who die; infants : And how.

rinclpls accords with all Infarcts

•being laved, ( who die Infants) iVjaQt-fii^

:%ujt: to underhand! If this be not Com a-:

diftia.w Termini^ viz,.. A Contradict V,ti-.

in plain Te ; oow net what a Conn?-

fiction mean's/ C i Tie

C 4P 1

The Lord Chriff ( who can neither lye
nor be deceived in what he faith ) allures
13$, that except 6ne be born again, he cannot
( pojfibly ) fee the Kingdom of God. Joh. 3.3.
wherein the abfoluteneed of Regeneration
Is difcovered and aiTerted •, and the Subjed
of which, this is predicated fin that Text)
being indefinitely and univerfally expreft;
we are taught that neither Adult nor Infant,
ihali ever enter Heaven, till that Work of
Regeneration pafs on the guilty polluted
Soul : A nd to fay that an Adult ( or grown)
Pe-rfon ( by reafon of his Age ) is capable of
this great Change, but that an Infant ( be-
caufe he wTants the ufe of reafon, &c. ) is
incapable of it. What is this but ( inter-
pretativelyj to hold and fayvthat the Crea-
tures own Will and Reafon muft concur to
the producing the New Creature in a Dead

And jhow advantageous this Principle is
iO tfafifts Arminians, Pelagians and Soci-
Sms> tbfc Learned and Orthodox, well

iftfiOW,.

The Enemies themfelves do (with us)
knowledge, that Water-Baptifm is iPaf-
frve Ordinance ; and iltange it is^. that
zilok ( of thaa. Party ) who are concerned to-
deck and adorn the Frontifpiece of their
Bocks ( TigainiV Infant Eaptilln ) with ftcfe
0**ete Fiourifhes of Greek, Hebrew, and:

Latin;

O J

Latin Sentences, do not ( in their way of
arguing about this matter) give us to under-
ftand that they underftand and know the
Meaning and proper Signification of the
Word Paflive, better than it appears they
do; certain it is, and the Learned know
it, that the Term Paffive fignifies and im-
ports a Non- agency in the SubjeQ:, when a
Change is palling on it, or a Work pro-
ducing in it; to the effecting of which >
Change (or Work) the Subjed recipient
neither wills nor^&s any thing towards thej
Produdionof fiich a Change.

If I underftand any thing of God's Mind >
(revealed in the Sacred Scripture ) or was
ever (experimentally ) acquainted with the
Spirits Method in paflingthat great Change :
on a Sinner, in efFe&ual Calling. The
Work confifts of two Parts; Firfr, God'i
Gracious Afts, in freely pardoning all ih&z
Rebel's Sins and Tranfgreflions committed i
againfl the Law, imputing to him that Spot-
lefs Rigbtepumefs of Ghrifl his Son i thr
Sinners Sponfor-or Surety J as truly and >
.really.. as if that Spotlefs Righteoufnel^ bad £
been a&ed and4 performed bj the Sinner ;
himfeif (perfonallf. ) This is the fir ft part -
wherein that great Change lies or<corififtsr.
which, in Divinity is called jiifMcation,

The Second is, God's quickening and Te- •
BQwisg the inward Powers ajid R&sUiesofl

the Soul, by communicating a principle of
Spiritual Life to the Sinner, in every of the
Souls Faculties within: 1 do not mean (or
intend) that in this Work of Regenerating
the Sinner, the natural Faculties ( concrea-
:;d with the Nature of Adam J aredeftroy~
ed or annihilated, but that the Predomi-
; of thofe vitious Qualities (inhering
in the Souls Faculties) is overpowered by
the Sanftihcation of the Spirit; and a con-
trary Principle of facing (and nnloofable)
Grace is communicated to every of thefe
ies in tlie Soul, whereby the new Prin-
cornmunicated, maintains its own
in thofe refpective Faculties, ( and
'rough the continual fupply of the Spi-
.:;h producedthe Change) and making
nxalReftftance again ft that Vice and
Corruption ( as yet ) remaining in the fame
[ties where, the new Creature is ap-
pointed to War and Combat, until that
■Sinlefs Perfection/ pro mi fed in the Cove-
nant of Grace; fuperiede and difpofTefs that
Lg Corruption (. in the Soul ) under
h the new Creature continues to groan,
a peifect IVel cafe come.
This is called Sanchfication • and when
the fet time (prerievt in God's Decree ) for
ca:lii:; i Sinner, is come ^ what prc-

Jh this great Civ ii«e ?

I will

(43)

I will fuppofe the Sinner to be come to
the Years of Manhood, capable of acting
or exercifing his natural Faculties •, doth
his Wilhor his Reafon help the Almighty in
producing.fo miraculous a Change? Can the
Eye of this Sinners blind Reafon (and under-
ftandingj fee into or comprehend the hid-
den Myftery of that Wifdom manifefted
and fet forth in that ftupendious and afto-
niihing Contrivance of God's juftifying and
reconciling to himfelf an Apoftate^Rebel^
Sinner, by the imputed Righteoufnefs o£
another ? Can the Eye of blind Reafon be
capable of this ? Can the Will of this dead
Sinner incline or. move it felf towards the
Sinners own Converilon, to be a Coadjutor
or Fellow-helper, to forward or help the
Almighty in effecting this ftrange and mi-
raculous Change ? Can it (ppffihiy ) be that
Spiritual (or Corporal ).Blindnefs can cure-
it felf, or that Enmity .and Rebellion can
change its own Nature .p

Let the Experience of every (rightly) af-
filed Believer fbeak to this;

• If then nothing

ie poor dead Sinner,

neither .the-ufe <:■:■

natural Reafon, nor

yet any Adi-vity in his 1

contribute any h;

projiiK^ xo wonder-

fniaClvin--:^:?; "

p n -

tirelvjG i W£

i ioni vviiicn i ar-

gue hi il I of j

}oot :-a-;s, it God

C 44 )
/can, and doth freely pardon and blot out
the Millions of a&ual Sins (added to the
original Guilt;of an adult Sinner , if he can
a*nd doth freely and mod gracioufly impute
the'Righteoufnefs of his Son-, and by thus
j doing, juftifies an adult Sinner : If God can
(and doth) by the irrefiftable Efficacy, of his
own holy Spirit, renew the Faculties of the
Soulof an adult Sinner, which is (as I may
| fay) fteeped(and evenfoaked ) in.Vitiofity
and actual Pollution •, cannot the fame Al-
mighty, Juft, Wife and Gracious God do
and effecl: the like change in. and upon a
poor helplefs Infant, though that Infant
underftand not what is done to it, neither
lis capable of contributing any Help towards
fo great a Change ?

From what hath been ( here ) offered to
Confideration, to me it is evident and plain,
that when Men cry out and fay, Infants
( while Infants) areuncapable of Regenera-
tion, becaufe they want the ufe of Rea-
fo'n, &c. they fpeak mofl: injurioiuly and
ignorantiy againfl God himfelf, as if he
could not ( or would not) effecl: that in and
for an Eled Infant which he doth for an a-
dult Sinner v as the jnftifying and renswing
an adult Sinner hath no Dependance on the
Keafon, Will or Speech of a grown Sinner,
even fo the Want of acraal'Reafon^Aclivky
of Will or Speech in an Infant, csnncs pof-

fibiy).

C 4f )
fibly ) hinder God from effefting this great
and gracious Work in and upon an Eleft In-
fant, though the poor Infant can do nothing
towards fo great a Change. The Subject
Recipient of this Work of Regeneration, h
( every way ) Paffive, the Adult as well as
the Infant. -

Agreeable to this Aft of GodVitt chang-
ing a Sinner, is that Ordinance of Water-
Baptifrn, whofe principal life is twofold.
Firft, to fignifie and reprefent his own gra-
cious Dealing with the Sinner ( Baptized) in
Pardoning all his Sins, for Ghriit's fake-
whofe Blood (reprefented by the Water in
Baptifm ) was fhed for the Remiffion of the
Sins of all, comprehended in that Covenant
of Grace, whereof Baptifm is-a SeaL And
Secondly, that it may be a Seal to confirm
to the Baptized ( if Eled) all the gracious
Promifes of the fame Covenant of Grace ,
as God's Work (upon the Soul of a true Con-
vert) is, inrefpelt of the Sinner, wholly
Paffive ; fa Baptifm (the outward Sign and
Sealof God's Covenant of Grace) isaltoge*
ther Paffive- And as the Wifdom of Chrift
favv fit to appoint the Element of material
Water to beufed in Baptifm, as ■( above all
thQ other Elements J moil fuited to the de-
fign of that Ordinance, becaufe of the Ana-
logy and' Refemblance which is between
Water and the: Blood of Ghrift ? fo no

Mode

( 46 )

Mode or Way of Adminiflring this Water-
Baptifm doth fo exactly and to the Life, let
forth the Freenefs of God's Grace and Mer-
cy (exhibited ) in the Covenant of Graced
then the Act of Sprinkling or Pouring ous
the Wa^er on the Party Baptized. By this
way of Sprinkling ( under the Gofpel) there.
is a fweet and orderly Harmony kept be-
tween the Pen-Men of God's Word, 1.
under the Old, and Nevv-Teftarnent Dif-
-penfation, with whom, whoever ftudys t>
agree(in applying the Water of Holy Bap-
tifm) they will be at length found to
in the right, how many and black Cjerxfures
foevcr are heapt on. them by injudicious
Spirits : The Spirit of God ( in the Work
of Regeneration) applys the Spiritual Bap-
tifnrby Sprinkling or Pouring out of his
Graces on the Soul. There muft be an A-
nalogie kept between the thing ilgnified
and the outward Sign.

Againit what hath been laid down to
prove Infants Right to Baptifm, ( the Seal
of God's Covenant ) many things are ob-
jected . I will, for Brevity fake, contract the -
Objections, with my Anlwers, to as few
Particulars as poffibly I can.

Object, i.. In the Words of the Gr.
Comm ffiott-) there is not one Word concerning
Infant s\ Mat. 28. 19. Go ye and teach all
Nations, baptizing them in the Name, 1

This

-C 47 )
This feems to weak ( though well mean-
ing ) Minds to be unanfwerable : But in the
ftrength of him who gave out this Grand

' Com million, I hope to (hew how wretched-
ly the* Objector is miftaken herein.

In order whereto, let two things bc^
rioutly^C anot warily) considered.
• Firfiy That albert Ghrift tne Lord doth
not mentioa Infants ( in particular) yet he
includes them in the Words of the general
Comrriiillon, Go Teach all Nations, Baptizing
themy&£. Here the Lord commands ( ex-
preily ) that all fuch as' belong to God's
Covenant (with Abraham) Gen. 7. 7. fnall
be Baptized : namely, all who (hall embrace
the Son of (fc>d by Faith, and their Infant-
Seed ( if any they have). That this is the
true fenle and meaning of Ghrilr, in that
place, is clear to any wrro do not r wilfully)
fhut their Eyes :y for evident it is, and none
can den-y'fthat he (there) commands to Bap-
tize all Nations, not excepting againfc or

-forbidding the Diiciples to baptize little
Infants: He knew that he fpake to Men,
who ( after the fending of the Holy Ghbft )

"fiiould know and co n fid er that Jhraham's
Covenant ( with Believers and their- Infant-
Seed) was to remain and continue the fame
to the end of the World. And this, ( to-

I gether with the fharp Rebuke he gave to his

1 Apoftles, for. offering to hinder little Ones

being;

(48 )

being brought to him ; and his laying be-
fore them fuch a convincing Reafon where-
fore ftich mould not be kept from coming
to him, Mark 10. 14. was the principal, ( if
not the only Reafon) wherefore his infinite
Wifdom favv it not needful to mention In-
fants in particular, they being (molt cer-
tainly) included in the general "terra, all Na-:
tions : All Men fwho know any thing of
Learning) underftand that Omne majtu
continet in fe minm^ ( every greater includes
or contains in ittbelefierj is a fure and
Handing Rule both in Logick and Divinity.
Agreeing with this Senfe ( I have given
off the grand Commiffion ) is that of i&pr^
J&ts 2. 39. For the Promije is to jott and to
your Children^ &c which affords an invin-
cible Argument to prove that there is (now
under the Gofpel ) no Change of Abraham's
Covenant, /any other than in the external
Ad'miniftration of it ) The Covenant (.in its
fubflauce) abides the fame for ever: By.
the Grace thereof all God's Elcft ( both of
the.Jewifn and Gentile Race ) are to be fa-
ved. Rom. 3. 29. What I have faid will
yet receive farther Confirmation by what is
laid down by Paul in Gal. 3. 14. That the
Bleffing of Abraham might come upon the
G 'entiles , through Jefus Christ, &c. The
Places now quoted out of Jcls 2. 39. and
GaL 3. 1 4 prefuppofe a Command to all,

( whether

C 49 )

(whether Jew or Gentile ) who (by Faith)
receives Jefns Chrift for a Saviour) that
they (hall be iigned with the Seal of Abra-
ham's- Covenant, according to Gen. 17. 9.
For if the Gentiles^ who believe in Abra~
ham's Saviour, do cxpeft that they and their
Infants fhould be made adual Partakers of
the Bleffings .of Abraham's Covenant ; they
muft be fure to obferve and keepGocTsGo*
venant with Abraham throughout their
Generations.

Secondly, feeing that Chrift (himfelf )
words the CommiffionTo in general terms,
(which, undoubtedly, includes the parti-
cular) not excepting againft Infants : It mu.fi
neceffafiry fellow, that if Infants be apart .
of thofe Nations which the Apoftles ,
&c. are commanded to Baptize \ that
Chrift commands them to Baptize Infants .
as well as any others. Reader , obferve
the. Words of tie CommHHdn, Go and
Teach all Nation s, &c. Here is no more
mention of grown Perfons, Men or Wo-
men, than there is of Infants. If then A-
nabaptifts cannot deny that Infants are a
part of Nations, and that they can no way
prove how Abraham's Bleffing can come on
the Gcntiles7 through Chrifl Jefus,. any o-
ther way than by and through the Cove-
nant of Abraham \ It will (unavoidably )
follow ( ail the Wit in Man cannot oppofe

it

it with Succefs) that Infants as well as-adult
Perform are Cas the proper Subjects of Bap-
tifnu) intended^ by Chiift) in the Grand
Com million.

Object. 2. None are the 'proper Subjects of
Eaptlfm, but fitch as are firft taitght, Go
and Teach, &c. Infants are , not capable of
Mans Teachhtg^ therefore they are not the
proper Sub f els of Baptifin.

Jnfw. This, with the Objection already
ipok'en to, feems (to weak and injudicious
People) to be unanfwerable, (for excluding
Infants from Baptifm) but he. that looks
into it with a fpiritual Eye, will find no-
thl ng i n it .agai h ft I n fa nts.

In order to difcover the Weaknefs and
MiA:ake of the Objector, let it be oblqrved
( with Care ) that the Word Teach, is twice-
mentioned inane Words of the Commiffion r
■Go^ and "Vtach all Nations^ Baptizing themy
&c. And inVer. 20. Teaching them toob-
fervg, &C.

T tie firft Teach, is (in the Original) Ma-
thet fin fate \ and the other is, Didashntes ;
which I choofe to fet down ..in the Englfli
(rather than in the Greek) Character, to
the end the unlearned may Read them -7
and in Reading, obferve the great Diffe-
rence which is between the two Words,
and that both in the Letters and Sound of
the Words * if this be taken Notice, of, it

will

wil- afford to the Unlearned fwhoV
.not be impos'd upon; groiind jto Tii:
not only the Skill (In Tongues,) but alio the
-Honelty_:ahd Faithful nefs of thbfe Guides,
whom they judge come nearer io Infallibi-
_llty in what they teach, than do the other
eminent Servants of Chrift, .who differ
from them'- and at whofe JLabours the a--
bleU Preachers of that Party, are glad to
light their. Candles.,

As thefe two Words differ, in Letters
and Sound, as the Unlearned themfeives
will find, (if they be but .Faithful to them-
selves,)- fo they differ alio in their Senfe and
Signification, as the Orthodox and Learned
well know. I begin with the firft, vizi
pfatbetmfate7 which fignifies ( properly ) to
Difciple, or to make Difciples in all Na-
tions,* where th^.Goipel ihall be (gladly)
received.

, How is this to be done I Aafw. Even
as God taughtAiraham, when he Inftrii-
cted him in the great Myftery of the Cove-
nant : The- which , when Abraham em-
brac'cl for himfelf and his Infant-Seed, he
receiv'd f gladly J the Viilhle Token or Seal
[f} that-Cpvenant of Grace, 'vizj. Circum-
^iion, and marks out his infant-Seed, by
jutting the fame Seal of the Covenant on
Pern, and that ia compliance with God's
iCommand. -

h

( 51 )

It is but rational to fuppofe and grant,
that the firft Subjefts of an Ordinance
fhould be Perfons Adult and grown up to
the life of Reafon, that they may be capa-
ble of afting for not only themfelyes, but
for their Off-fpringand Poftenty alfOjWho
are not ( while Infants ; capable of acting
for themfelves. . ,

This was God's Way and Method with
■jibraham C his Friend) he propounds his
Covenant of Grace to him, and (m him) to
his Seed, as their ftlpulating.and cove-
nanting Head and Representative. In in-
ftrudting Jlbrdxm, God, in Grahams
Perfon, infinite his Infants fo as by that
Inftruftion his Infant Seed became : Difa-
ples, and were ( accordingly ) fign d with
the Seal of their ftipulating Father s Co-

VCThis undoubtedly, was the Method
which the Apoftles went in, .when they
were fent forth to make Difciples (to
Thrift ) in every Nation. They lnftrufted
Adut and Grown Perfonsin the Myftery
of God? Grace (by Cbrift; and when
fuch laid hold on Chrift ( in the Covenant;
by an External Profeffion of Faith inhim)
thev wete Baptised with their Infants,^ if
any thef had.) Hence we read of the Jay-

was Baptized, helnd all that were of him.

em-

ytk;. His own Perfonal Oif-fpring, fo the
■■Greek Word fignifies. Hence alfo we read
Qf whole Families, who were Baptized (.by
the Apoitles) on the Faith of fueh as were
the Heads of fuch Families. It was no more
jieceflary, that Infants fhould be made men-
tion of, ( as being in .-fuch Families when
Baptized } thaiHt was, that they fhould be
Dam'd in the grand Commiffion ; the Spi-
rit which gave otit the Grand CommHlIon,
was in, and with the Apoftles, when they
Baptized} and it is, to me, convincing,
that Infants are intended in both, feeing
they are excepted agai nil in neither, which
the Adverfary rnuft ( needs ) be convinc'd
of, nnlefs he be able to prove, that Infants
are- neither a part of Nations or of Fami-
lies.

The other Word teach, in the Commif-
fion is, Djdaskomes, which (properly) fig-
nifies a Teaching or Intruding ( Do<ftri-
nally ) thofe who are already made Dif-
ciples by the former way of Teaching. Nei-
ther can it, without Lying, be faid to be
Nonfenfe and Folly, "to- term Infants ( who
are by the firft Teaching made Difciples ;
Scholars or Difciples, feeing, that Infants
fin Age) are ( by the Spirit of Truth ) fo
iftyl'd, witnefs^r ic. jo. where fuch are
called Difciples, who were made fo by
,the Initiating Ordinance of Circumdiioj^
I who

(*4)

who afterwards (when grown upj were
taught (Dodtrinally) what they were to
know and practife ; neither is this ( any
whit ) repugnant to the Method God ton!:
with Jbraham^ but rather agreeing with
it; as appears by Gen. 18. 19. and evena-
mong Men nothing more common and fre-
quent, than to call our little Children
Scholars or Difciples, and that from the
very firft Day of their being entred into a
School: And as in~Mens$chools there are
fundry Ranks or Gaffes of Scholars, fome
lower and fome higher ; flo. in the School
of Ghrift( the great Prophet of his Church)
there are feveral Ranks or Degrees of
Church Members. It is well known how
ignorant ( in the Myfteries of the Gofpel }
the very Apofties themfelves were, when
they firft entred into ChrifFs School • yet
Chrift calls them his Difciples for all that.
The Apoftle Paul Could not write or fpeak
unto the Cormhimu, but as unto Babes, as
unto Carnal Men • yet they were Church
Members for all that. Thefe things duly
coniidered, forces me to conclude thofe
Men profoundly ignorant in the Myftery of
God's Holy Covenant • who ( becaufe In-
fants are uncapable of being taught and in-
ftrufted ( Doetrinally ) as adult and grown
Men are) peremptorily deny that Infants
are capable of being made Difciples ( to |

Chrift) !

C 55 )
| Chnft) by the Miniftry of Men. Thk
f Principle came, no doubt, from the time
;. Spirit which teaches that Infants/ while
j Infants, -are uncapable of Regeneration-
; which are both ( manifeflly ) falfe, becaufe

contrary to God's revealed Will.

Object. 3. Baptifm is a Seal of 'the Rlvhte-

oufnefs of Faith, to which none have a rich
! Mthem-fiewhoisarealtrue.Bdiever "'

. Anfw • I anfwcr in three Particulars. Eirft

f of l?rh "l^ 3 Seai °f the Rig^eoufnefs
! ot fcaith, then rnuft it needs-fucceed anH

come m the room of Circumcision IndCo
1 whJ/UthfS Ojere) granted, which elfe! "
■■ZPfu^1^' that Ci'Cmnci!Iofl is a
j Seal of the Righteoufnefs of Faith , h mol

a Seal of theRignteouftefs of Faithf ( a ^ the
Objeftor grants, antfas I believe and 5?™
» is) then Bapthm did ( nndeniably)ct™
m%h bTo g,&rcumciii9n' thac S 8£

H§£ 1 v ? beiievrlng :<?e»ft/«. ( under t^e
jGo^ei) what Circumciilon was, of O 'd

lof Grafe^' ^ ^ of »e Covenant

iwf/^u If n?ne but aftlJal Believers

K ?. \ ?eal> mm mi,fl: 't follow ( u-r
j variably ) that all Infants, who die in "

S a™- eterMlIy bft: And h0wri H

/hisDoanneis.andhowinconSltentwVi
1 D

( 56 )

the Doctrine which teacheth that all In-
fants, dying Infants, are laved, all Men
may fee.

Thirdly, If none but real true Believers
have a Right to Baptifm, I would gladly
fee how thofe, I difpute againft, can juftifie
their own Practices, in admitting fo maty
poor ignorant Folk to that Ordinance (in
their way ) who (with fome who admit
them ) are as ignorant of the Myftcry of
Regeneration and of Baptifm, ( the exter-
nal Seal thereof) as was Nicodcnms. Can
they, without a Divine Revelation, know
tbatthof: whom they admit to Baptifm are
( infallibly ) real true Believers ?

Object. 4. To af ply Baptifm, ( the Seal of
the Covenant ) to an unintelligent SubjcEt, who
neither knows what is clone to kiih} nor ycilds
con Cent thereto : It is. all one as to pre fern a
Vihptre to A blind Man.t which to do> is moll
abfurd and rid-adous.

' ' JrSw. To this I fhal! reply in four Par-
ticulars. A ad Firft, I fay, w ith a Learned
Man, this is, at heft, but a blind Compa
rifoa :, and ( which is far worfe ) a high anc
fancy Reflection, on the infinite Wiidon
and* uncontroulablc Sovereignty of %ht
molt high God ; for moil certain it is, tha
nothing can bc'ofrercd as an Argument t<
keep Infants from ffiptifm, (meerfj) on th
account of their t>siag unintelligent Sub

tea

( J7)
jects, and uncapable of yeildiifg their Con-
tent to what is done to them in Baptifm ).
But what will be of as great force to keep
them back from Circumcifion ? And fo th£
Objector may fee plainly how ( herein )
he arraigns the Wifdom and Sovereignty
of God at the Barr of a (hallow and corrupt:
Creature's Reafon, which demonlrrates him
to be more Brutifh ( I am fure more proud
and Wicked J than thofe Non-intelligent;
Subjects which the Objection is 'levelled
againft.

This will appear by cOnfldering God's
dealing with Abraham, in that he command-
ed him to Mark, or Seal, his Son Ifaac with.
the Seal of Circumcifion at Eight Days old.
Had Ifaac the ufe of -Reafon at that Age ?
Had he actual Faith cr Speech to exprefs
his Confent to what was (then ) done to
him ? No fure^ what then isffi God be
charged with Weaknefs- or Unreafcnable-
nefs for applying the Seal of his Covenant;
to an unintelligent Subject ? By tfeefe kind
of Objectors, God's Act (herein ) Rmds
charged with Weaknefs and Folly ; But 1
conclude with Paul, Rom. 3. 4. Tea, tct &M
be true, but every Mart a Lyar. God com-
mands nothingin vain, and the reafon is be-
~aufe his Ordinance hath no kind of deperi-
ience on the Creature, to give it Power, or
:o make it effectual to accompli (hwhau he
D 2 bath

C 58 )

hath appointed it to, but on his own free
Spirit, which works molt powerfully, yea,
iiTefiitably, where he himfelf hathpurpofed
to confer the Spiritual Good, fignified by
the outward Ordinance.

Object. 5. The Promife of God's Covenant
is made to the Elect , and none but they have a
Right to the Seal: No Alan can affirm that an
Infant brought to Baftifm is Elect.

A'ifvo. I anfwer to this in two thirigs.
Firft, I grant that none [hall ever reap any
iaving Benefit by the Covenant, but the E-
Ie<ft :, ( and that in the Right of Election )
yet doth it not hence follow, that none but
they have a Right to the Seal of the Cove-
nant in the Church Viiible, feeing that^by
. the very Conititution of God's Covenant
(with Abraham the Ecclefiaftical Father,and
Pubiick Viiibic Head of all the Seed of Be-
lieving Church-Members ) God commands
that the Seal of his Covenant (hall be equal-
ly applfd to all the Male Seed of the Be-
liever :, and that without any Regard to the
Election, which is a Secret known (only)
to God j about which he would not have
us to trouble dur Spirits, any farther than
to give all ( becoming) Diligence to make
our own ( Perfonal ) Election fure to our
felves; As touching the Infants of Church
Members, about whom, all the Difpute is,
We are not ( aaxioufly * to be concerned a-

.bouti

( 59 >
bout them, whether: they be m the tkCri-
on of God, yea or no. It is ground fbf-
ficient for us'to biefs and thank God for his
dealing fo graciouily with our Infants, in
that they, with us,nre taken .into the fame
Covenant,, and Sealed with the Seal there-
of j for by God's dealing thus. wjth^Belie^
v^rsinfant^Seed, BeJieyei'i Have; a go&fy
Foundation kid^jwhej^n^ibot^
Hope_and Comfort^ ( w.ith Reference to:
their Dying or Dereaied-Infants ) and alio {

€ojrvej^pn_and,^^ the

which the Enemies to Infant-Baptifm, do '
C by denying that Infants belong to the Co-
venant, or have any Right to the Promifes
thereof, till they themfelves Relieve) de-
prive, and (infenfibly) (poll, them [elves'
of. .This is moil evidently true, as will
appear if it be ferioufly confidered, that
all rjgh t_Pxa_yer_i5 a*Heff<f j^H&$ • ferbmifesfl
of God ' s Covenant, >in the Najrj^aiidjyleritj
qf_ .Chrjft his own Son, in and through'
whom., the faid Promifes are intaiPd on all.
theChildren of Promife : Now if my Infant!
be fick or ailing, if he be going on in Sin,
&c\ how cap I (by the Anabaptift Prin-
ciple) put up a Prayer to God for him,
feeing there is no Promife of God's Cove-
I nant belongs to him ? Or how can I comfort
j my forrowful Spirit ( with reference to my
D 3 Deceafed

C 60)

Deceafed Children ) if I mull look on my
dear Babes as Strangers and Enemies to
God, ( the which they are by Nature ; and
nnii ft remain fo for ever) in cafe they be not
Partakers of the Grace of God's Covenant f
Secondly, If none but the Elecl; have
Right to Baptifm, this Objection will fall
like a Mill-ftooe on them who Baptize
whole Droves of Men and Women , of
whofe Election r to eternal Life ) neither
Baptizcr nor Baptized, know any more than
they know how many Stars in the Firma-
rnent-, To that by thus arguing ag3inft poor
Tongne-ty'd Infants, they may fee how
they deny Salvation to their own, as well
as others, Infants, and render themfelves
uncapable of difchargin»g a good Confcience
to their poor Children, in putting up ( dai-
ly > Petitions to God for them.
; Object. 6. We have an open Profefflon from
thoje we Baptize^ and that warrants our Bap-
tiding fitch as offer themfelves to join to the
Churches. Ton have not the like from Infants.

Anfvo. I anfwer hereto in three Parti-
culars. Ff>&S It were well for both Bapti-
zers and Baptized, if both the one and the
other were better. acquainted with the Na-
ture of right Converfion than they are, and
that they were better grounded in the found
(and experimental ) Knowledge of the Co-
venant of. Grace j the which, ifthev were,

C 6i )

I dare ( boldly ) fay, they would not be fo
precipitant and ra(h in condemning and de~
ipidng thofe poor Infants,who are fet forth
( by the Wifdora of God ) as Patterns and
Examples, by which grown Perfons are to
be moulded and fitted for Heaven : Nei-
ther would they be fo forward t;o offer
themfelves to Baptifm on fuch flight and
evanid Motions, as falls fhort. ( in too ma-
ny ) of common Convictions.

Secondly, Poor Irrfan^nevexCy et) broke ^
QJJ^r^felgflkdjthe Moral Law, ( Perfonal- %
ly ) and that is one great Reafon why an>;
actual Confeifion.of 1 aith and Repentance |
is_ not required of "thereto qoalifie them for \
Baptilm.; As the Sin of Infants lies in the ^
Imputation of Mam's Difobedience, and
the" Pollution of Nature, derived by fleflily
Generation ; fo their Help and Remedy lies
in the Imputation of Chrift's Spotiefs
Righteoufnefs to their Perfons } and his
Spirits renewing their inward Faculties in
Regenerating them. And this twofold
Work of the Spirit in juftifykig and fancti-
fyingthe Elect Infant, is (plainly ) iignified
and fealed in that Ordinance Gf Baptifm, ,
to the Infant, as well as to a grown Believer.

Thirdly,- Albeit Infants be not able to

fpeak for themfelves, and to claim that

Right to the Seal of God's Covenant which

the Covenant it felf hath'entajrd on them,

D 4: - (as

X as they are the Church Seed of Believing
Parents ) yet there is one who (peaks for
them, whole Judgment and Teftimony of
them is more Jure and infallible than ano-
ther Testimonies of Men and Angels- the
lord Jefus, I mean, who ( with his Father,
and God the Holy Choir. ) contrived and
made the Covenant of Grace, wherein they
are comprehended. ' I will lay down in fix
Particulars what is the judgment of Chrift
concerning Infants, \ as they are concern-
ed in the Covenant ) Firfi, he propounds
them a* Patterns, by which grown Perfons
KMjft be moulded and fitted for Heaven,
Mku 18. 3. Secondly, declares their Right
to the Kingdom of God, Mar. 1 o. 1 4. For
of fitch is the Kingdom of God. Thirdly, re-
bukes (moftfevereiy) his Difciples for hin-
dering Infants being brought to him, Mark
10. 14. Bat when Jefe faro it, he was much
difpleafed, &c. Ill the Greek it is Egarzak-
te'.e, which fignifies to have the Bowels (in-
wardly J moved, or aftecled with Grief, to
be filled with Indignation \ as Bez.a ren-
ders. it; Indignatus eft, to be Stomackt at
a Perfon, or a thing which is greatly or
highly difpleafing : A Word which judici-
ous Sydenham obferves, was never ufed by
Chrift in any cafe, or on any occasion, be-
fides this of poor Infants, to inilrncl: and
teach Men: (No doubt) how greatly he

was

c m

was concerned for helplefs Infants, and
how difpleafed he was at the Hardnefs of
his Difciples Hearts again.ft them : Oh !
that the Coniideration of this might melt
the hard Hearts of fuch, into a Chrift-like
Tendernefs towardspoor Infants. Fourth-
ly> commands Infants to be brought to him±
Mark 10. 14. Suffer little Children to corns
unto me^ &c. Fifthly , pronounces them
holy, Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Sixthly y
bleifeth them,. Mark 10. 16. And he took
them up in his Arms^ laid his Hands upon them,
and Blcffed rhem... Thef^ Six Particulars
laid together, and weighed in the Baila nee
of God's San&uary, I leave it to any Man of
Senfe (in Spiritual Matters) to judge whe-
ther is fafer to credit this Infallible Teftir-
mony of the Son of Gqd, concerning In-
fants, than to rely on the bare Teftimony
of a rneer Man, concerning himfelf y wha
may, in all he pretends to, be but a Painted
Sepulchre.

9

Object, J. If Infants musl meds have
I Right to Baptifm^ becaufe it is a Seal of ;h§
! Covenant $ theny of necefflty., they muB tyave
i- a Right tothe Lord' 's Stopper _alfa y for that n
: a Seel of the Covenant of Grace as well, as
\B.aptifm. The Wine in the Suf per might
I well be poured down the Infants Aiouth with
I Spoon, as tofprinkle Water on his Face.
I Anf?>\ -This- Objection- better ..becomes
i Efi S

cm

a Superannuated Man,, who borders on
perfcft Dotage, than one who pretends to
be a Teacher of ignorant and mifguided
Souls £ and not only fo, but who takes on
him to ufurp the Seat of Judgment, in pa&
ling Sentence on all the Holy, Learned and
Orthodox Divines, and Proteftant Martyrs
and Churches, who are gone to glory in
the unfhaken Belief that the Infants of Be-
lieving Parents have an unqueftionable Right
to Baptifra, and that they are as capable of
the Seal of Baptifm as they are of the Grace
of God's Covenant, fignified thereby.

But that the_Lo^dVj>uj)pe^^
feme But to adaU and actual Believers, who
are^rj^lej)fj^^

in, a worthy Communicant *r fuch' as Self-
examination ( with Reference to his State
God-ward:; his Faith in Ghrift, his Progrefs
ma. Holy Life,, his difcerning the Lord's
Body, his keeping up a lively Communion
with. Father, Son and Spirit in that Ordi-
nance, and judging ones felf in cafe of fhort
^O'ming in holy Duties.

•Th'efe are the Qualifications required to
He- in one who comes to the Lord's Supper:
0 which, any ( not in a Dream) may judge.
m £hW& cannot be capable, ( while an In-
line ) 1 humbly hope fra judicious Chrifti-
m w.ilicenfure me, asralh«and uncharitable,
ft I judge thole fo.cactets fitter for a Shos-

hoav4

r$ )

board than a Pulpit, who are not able or
i willing to difcern. or diftinguifh between
I Milk and ftrong Meat \ and who will deny
! to Infants the Miik of Holy Baptifm,
\ ( whereof they are capable, and whereto
( by God's Covenant ) they have right, .be-
, caufe they are uncapable of receiving and
|j digefting the ftrong Meat of the Lord's-
j Supper.

J Object. 8. If Infant-Baptifm were God's
j Ordinance, and were accompanied with his
1 Blejfm?^ to the Infant, how comes it to pafs9
j that Jo many Baptised, {in Infancy ) prove
fo Carnal and Looje in their Lives an4 Con—
j vcrfations ?

i jfofip. Hereto" I reply in, three Partial-
j lars, wherewith I (hall Ihut up the prefent
j Difptite.

Firtf, It is with many Believers Infants
now ( under the Gofpel ) as it was with A.-
braham and his Infants of old. Some are.
their Children by flelhly Generation- only3
who ( Ijlmad-like) prove Mockers and:
Scoffers at Holinefs, and Haters of God
and good Men: Thefe, ( notwithftandiiig. i
the Relatioj^-t^ey1tan<t in to the Churchy,
I by Virtue of their Baptifmal Vow and the.- J
. External Profeflion they makeJin the Yi(r-->
ble Church for a time) being left to the
Parknc& and Eoily lodged m their cor-
rupted. Nature^ they, give .. thgffifeJv.es- over

C 66 y

toallkindof.Loofenefs. Baptifm now) is
no more to be faulted on this account, than
Circumcifion was formerly.

When the Children of believing Gen-
tiles do (actually ) violate God's Covenant,
and depart from him^ then will God do
with them, as he did with Jbrabam's Car-
nal Seed, &£.

Secondly, As fome of the Children of be-
lieving Parents, who were Baptiz'd m In-
fant State, prove loofe and vain, fo blef-
fed be God, a great many prove holy and
upright Walkers with God, manifefting
la their Lives and Conventions, thelive-
i.y Copy of that Spiritual Circumcifion
wrought (by the Spirit) in their Hearts
when Converted, which was iignified and
fa led by that Baptifm, which they were
made Partakers of when Infants.

Thirdly and lafily0 If from the vain and

ful Practice, of fome (Baptized in Infancy)
(ijiaru.-Baptifm mull be difallow'd , (as
W- IniHtutioii of God ) how ftrong an

./anient will this prove, to overthrow

tilt Baptizing, grown Profeffbrs ? For (if

. not ) the Oppofcrs'of Infant- Bap-

i i amir, own, ( will they nill they ) that.

snn\y of thofe Baptize:' 'in their way)' have

ading their mining Profeflibn,

,ns to the Work of

bin) fallen, moll;. foully, and

And'

( 67 )
And thus I have, according to the Wif*
dom given from above, endeavoured, to
clear up, ( from God's Word ) that Abra-
hams Covenant, Gen ij. 7. is ( moft cer-
tainly ) the Covenant of Grace. I have al-
io prov'd (from the fame AVo^d) that Cir-
cumcifion was. the Seal of that Covenant:
And that Baptifm ( under the Gofpel) is
now fucceeded ( or come in the room )
thereof. I- have endeavoured to prove,
that the Infants of believing Gentiles have
as real a Right to Baptifoi as Abrahams
Seed had to Circumciilon, vinder that dark
Difpeniation. And whether the A nfwers
I have given .to the moft material Objecti-
ons, I find brought againft Infant- Baptifm,-
be pertinent and convincing, I leave to the.
judicious and unprejudiced to judge,

G H A ?. %

Of Tmmsrjion, Proving that Gofpel Bdptifm
ii by Sprinkling, not by Dipping.

AMong all the RaHi and Prefumptuous'
AfTertors of Dipping the whole Body
under Water, being.theoniy right-Mode or.
• Manner of Baptizing^ none hath made a.-
greater Noife. ( or a fairer (hew ) of being,
^Herein ) infallible* than om William Ru$d^

who..

C 68 )
who flryles himfelf Mcdlcim Doftor Acca-
demidt Camabrigienfis.

This Author, with a more than ordina-
ry Confidence, hath boldly aflerted, that
Dipping, &c. is the only right Mode of
Baptising, commanded by Chrift in the
New-Teftamenr, and pra&ifed by John the
Baptift, and all the Apoitlesand Primitive
Christians.

This crude ( or raw ) Aflertion of his, he
labours to fupport and make good by a
fourfold Medium : Firft, The Etymologie
of the Greek Word the Holy Ghoft ufeth
to exprefs Dipping by.

Secondly, Thofe Metaphors tifed in Ho-
ly Scriptures, to reprefent it to our Under-
ftanding.

Thirdly, The Pra&ice of the firft Bap-
tizers.

Fourthly, The Words of the Grand
Commiflion given by our Saviour in Mat.
28. 19.

To demonftrate the Falfenefs of his Af-
fertion, and to difcover to Weak and In-
judicious People, the great Miftakes where-
on he bottoms his Aflertion, is the Deiign
of my prefent Undertaking. But before I
attack this GoHah, in examining what he
can get from the four Particulars ( above
mentioned,) which may caufe fimple and
empty Brains to think and conceit this

Aceade-

( 69 )

Accademical Doctor, invincible and unan-
swerable in what he hath ( fo peremptori-
ly ) aflerted for the Truth of God. I will
lay down two things, ( by way of Premife)
whereof I defire the Reader ( who is unwil-
ling to be deceiv'dj to takeNotice,.

The fkft is, That not fo nrcch the Bare
Letter of 'Scripture ? as the Senfe and
Meaning of the Spirit, ( therein ) is the
Word of God ^ by which Truth and Er-
ror are to be try'd' and judg'd. I have
often faid, ( and I am very bold in affirming
that ) that Senfe or Interpretation, which,
any Man or Men give of any Text of God\
Wordj which thwarts and contradi&s the
An»alogie of Faith, that Senfe or Interpre-
tation is from the Spirit of Satan, not from
God, be the fame never fo plaufible and
pleadng to the Sons of Men • and be the
Authors never fo highly efteem'd of, for
both their Piety and Learning, There is
a fweet and an harmonious Concord and
Agreement between all the parts of God's
Revealed Religion, though but few ( com-
paratively ) can fee it to be fo. The Do-
ftrine and Institutions of God in all the par-
ticulars of his inftituted Worfhip, are
plain, eafie, and obvious to the Eye,wh&iv
the Spirit of Chri-ft hath anointed, i But
to fuch Men and WomenT who are Defli-
tute. of the Spirit, of Qiri.% nothing in

Religion

( ?o J

Religion appears to them^ bat Nonfenfe
and feeming Contradictions, which is the
Reafon why fo many thoufands in Eng-
land &c. ftagger and reel ( with a Spiri-
tual Vertigo ) in the Principles of the Pro-
teftant Religion, wherein both they and-
their Anceftors were Initiated ( by Water-
Baptifm O and in maintaining- of which,
they feemed (for many years) very Zea-
lous.

The fecond thing I (hall premife , is
this, ( viz.. ) That Heterodox and Corrupt
Underminers of the Gofpel are then to be
molt of all lookt after and watcht againft^
when they lay about them, to advance the
Fame and Credit of the Devil's Minilters,
by Eclipfmg and Darkening the Credit
and deferved Fame of Chrift's Worthys,
whom Chrift hath honoured with, being
the chief Combatants in the Lord's Battels
againfi the Powers of Darknefs in this
World.

My Deflgn in this, is to difcover to the
unwary Reader, this Doctor's Deiign of
blackening that Renowned and Incompa-
rable Servant of Chrift, Mr. John Cahln,
than whom,. I verily believe, the World
hath not ( fince the Apoftles left the Earth.)
feen a greater Divine.. A Man, whoy for
his high and excellent Endowments in all
manner- of Learning, efpecially his Eagter

eyedusfs:,)

C 71 )
eyednefs, in penetrating into the Senfe. of
i Scriptures ) was more like a Prophet, or an
, Apoflle, than an ordinary Preacher^

This Do&or, that he might put a Lu-
I fire on Michael Servcttv his Name, draws
i tliePencil, of horrid and black Reproach a-
| crofs the Name and Reputation of Holy
>■' and (as I (aid ) incomparable Calvin. The
i Devi! ( in his "Mini'fters ) being deeply fen-
j fible how the famous and elaborate Works
i of that one Man {land in the way, to pre*
| vent and hinder the Devil growing Ram-
pant, in advancing his Kingdom of Dark-
en efs among the Sons of Men.

Calvin is (by theDf ■■ ) reprefented as an

j ambitions, .Self feeking Man • and (which

| is far worfe) a bloody Perfecutor, whlle-his-

\ Servaus h deckt and adorned with the

; Robes of a glorious Martyrdom. The Drs.

Words will mew whether I be miHaken in

what I fay of him, fee Page 4 oftheDrs.

Epiftle,- where he faith, (.with a Spirit of

Virulency ) and at laft I concluded it mnft

certainly proceed from the very Spirit and

Principle of the firft founder jpf your Seclr,

Cleaning the Presbyterians) Matter John

Cdvin, who burnt the Books of Servetm%, a

Learned Baptift, and afterwards perfwa-

ded tfte^ Magiflrates of Geneva tcrbnrn him

alive j which Sentence was executed upon

him, ( as Cafieliia teflifies , who was a

con?

contemporary with him ) In thefe Words
Michael Servetui was burnt alive for his O-
pinion at Geneva , 15 C3, upon the 27th
Day of 08ober.

Beiides this, the Dr. tells his Reader,
(with an ungodly Deilgn, to leflen and
blacken the Famous Calvin, and to extol
his Servetus, ) that one well obferves, that
Mr. Calvin did acknowledge of Servers,
that lie was. a Learned Charitable Man -,
notwkhftanding which, lie wrote a Book
to iultifie Servetus being put to Death.

When I fee and read thefe things,
from a better and more impartial Tefti-
mony than Cafiellio was, 1 (hall then fay
fomewhat to it. But (indeed) Imullin-
genioufly aflure the Dr. that I fhall neither
believe him, nor his Cafhllh, in the Re-
ports they fpread abroad of Calvin, and
others (of Chrift's Worthys ) who detect
and decry their Heretical Doftrines.
^ Not him, becaufe fad Experience teaches,
that thofe of his Judgment are pretty
well skilled in Mifreprefenting and Be-
lying the moft Holy, Orthodox, and
moft Learned of Divines ; on purpofe to
gain Ground among the lefs intelligent,
whom they know to be flrangers to Au-
thors •, and who will be eafily drawn to
credit thofe Reports, which they are not
able to contradift : efpecially when repre-

fented

C 73 )
fented to them, by the Mouth and Pen of fuch
as they take to be good Men.

Not his Cafiellio0 becaufe I look on him
every way as unfit to ber a Witnefs againft
fo Orthoddx and great a Propugnator of
Gofpel Verities, as Calvin is known to be ;
And that, on the Account cf the Teftimo-
nies given of Caftellio\ by good and learned
Men, who better knew what CajZsllio was
than Dr. JRujJii doth.

The Great and Learned Scaliger charges
iCaftelllo with holding many corrupt Opi-
nions of the Aaahaftifts.

And the Learned Hoffman accufed him
for being one of the firft Sowers of the
| Seed of Arminiamfm.
, Tar, .' F*ker, another Great and- Learned
: Author, charged him with faying that the*
Song of Solomon was a Wicked Book.
And -.he held that Paul taught a more.
Myfterious Divinity to fome perfect Difci-
pies, than he, left in Writing, this is to be
feen in his Book, on the Firft Epiftle to
the Corinthians.

Now, if the impartial Reader ferioufly
| weighs the Account given of Calvin -and
\Caflellioj by the Orthodox and Learned,
ihe will foon conclude with me, That had
jthe Parts and Learning of Servetm and
Cafidlio both concenter'd in one Head,
Calvin's Orthodoxy in the Faith, and his

Excellency

(74)

Excellency in all manner of Learning, had
never been in Danger of Suffering an
Eclipfe : Nor yet his Books of receiving a
folid Anfwer ( much lefs a Confutation ) by
fuch Men as Servetm and Cajkllio^ what-
ever Dr. Riifell and his bigotted Profelytes
think or believe to the contrary.

That Eagle-eyed Calvin foared too high
( in penetrating into the Arc ma. Imperii of
Heaven ) for fuch Glow- Worms to reach
his Senfe, or to underftand the Spirit iy
which he fpeaks and Writes. Wifdom is
jttftified of none but her own Legitimate Ojf-
fpring, Mat. i i . 19.

And here I- defire the wary Reader to
take notice of the fraudulent Defign of Dn
Rujfcl, which is, toimpofe on his Reader,
a believing that Servetm ( who dy'd at Ge-
neva for his Opinion ) did die for being an
Anabaptift : which indeed is a notorious
Piece of Falfnood, as, the Learned and
Godly ( who look into Antiquity ) well
kaow, who give that Account of Se'rvetw^
that he was Executed at Geneva for his
Blafphemy againft: the Holy Trinity, he
denying the God-Head of Chrift, and the
Personality of the HolyGhoft.

This the Dr. well knew would have fpoil-
ed his Defign, had he ( honeftly ) told his
Reader/ what an Heterodox and'Blafphe-
mous Wretch , his Servem, that Learned

Baptift

C ?S D

Baptifl: ( who died ^t^C^eva for his Opi-
nion) was.

j And truly, (to be plain ) had Servant
;dy?d for being an Anabaptift ( which I ut-
terly deny he did, J yet, I am far from
•thinking the better of Anabaptifm there-
fore: Or judging ■Servetmi Cor any others
! who on that Account lofe their Lives ) to
i be true Martyrs of jefus.
( That Saying of Cjtpriw will ever be true,
I that Caufa, non Mors , fack Martirem:
'The Caufe, not Death, makes a Martyr.
(As the Bleffed Jefus hath his Witnefles
| who Seal the Word of his Patience, with
; their deareft Blood,

j So the ©evil hath his Witnefies, ( yea
'many more than Chrift hath ) who Seal
| their Infernal Herelies, and Damnable
| Doftrines, with their Hearts Blood -yet
T am far from believing that fuch Martyrs
will ever be owned by Chrift, at their ?oing
off the Stage: Or that fuch Sufferings
will make better the horrid Lies and Blaf-
phemies Men fuffer for, be their Con-
ftancy, feeming Zeal, and Courage what
fit will.

; Having premifed thefe things, I now
•proceed to examine the Four Particulars
twhereon his.Fabrick of Anabaptifm feems
jto be Founded.

I Tte

c ?o

The Dr. and (with him all Anabaptifts)
hold, and ( with great Confidence ) aflert :
that Dipping and Plunging the whole
Body under Water, is the only right
manner of Baptifm, which all Believers are
to pra&ife under the Gofpel. :

This he labours, (though in vain) to
■make good-by the Etymologie of the Word,
which the Spirit ufes to exprefs Baptifm by.

The Word ( in the Greek ( is b«it7i>,
which, faith the Dr. is derived from ***-
*.to Dip or Plunge a thing under Water.
This Signification of the Primitive Word
b*w« he confirms by Humane Teftimo-
ny • he begins with Learned Mr. Leigh,
to whofe Critica Sacra he refers his Read-
er in quoting whom, he deals with his
Reader as he did in quoting Scrvem\ he
faith that Servctus dy'd at Geneva for his
Opinion, but hides from his Reader the
horrid Blafphemies for which he died :
So here the Doftor ( defignedly ; curtails
the Obfervations of Mr Leigh on the
Word *»*'>, telling his Reader fo much
out of Mr. Leigh as he thinks makes tor
bis Caufe, but leaving out what or Mr.
Leigh he knows makes full agamft him -
which (I muft needs fay) is the Trick
of a Deceiver: And by theie kind oi
Shifts he, and the moll Crafty of his Party,
do endeavour to .underprop their finking

( 77 )■
Cau.fe, bearing poor flmple Folk in hand
that the Eminently Learned and godly
! Men ( whom they Quote ) were of the
I Anabaptiits Periwafion.
I Now to let his Unfairnefs appear herein '
I here fet down what of Leigh he quotes'
j and what of him he omits. *

j The Word ferlt^ faith Mr. Lekh, is
(derived' from the Word U^Ttmo to
j Dip or Plunge into the Water- and fieni-
j fieth ( primarily ; fuch a kind of Warning as
!:J3 ufed in Bucks, where Linnen is plunged
land dipt. Thus far the Dr. quotes Le%h%
and who would not think by reading fo
jmuch of Leigh, and looking no further
if as the Dr. no doubt would have his Read-
jer) but that Leigh in his Critic* W was
lot the Drs. Judgment herein.
j Now follows the Learned 2^/Qbfer-
vations on the Signification of the Word
\Miip yet, faith he, it is taken more
largely ( meaning Ay*/** ) for any kind of
walking, nnCn&..or- deanfing, even where
there is no Dipping at all; for which he
quotes Mat 3. ,,. / indtU Ea izx
with Water, . &c. Mat, 20. Zz. Are F able
fobe Baptized with, &c. -Mark 7 .4 .. - And
When thejfomefrvm the Market, except thoy
w*jh they *fe#^. Luke 3. 16. Acts 1. /

Jv, 'i* -1* md l Cor- lo *■ -In all
:$ftich Scripture Mr, Leigh doth acknow-

' ' leoVe^

( 78 )

ledge that b**V{« ( the Derivative ) is of a
larger Signification then b**™ its Prima-
tive, and intends fuch a warning as is done
without Dipping ^ and why fhould this be
concealed from the Reader?

As for Zeppeon*, Alftedim^ Plutarch and
Nazianz^en, (on whom the Dr. lays no
fmall ftrefs ) I hope he will allow us the
fame Liberty he takes to himfelf, ( viz,.) to
quote fuch Teftimonies as make for us,

The Learned Dr. Featly ( quoted by Mr.
Leigh ) tells us, that Chrifl: no where requi-
reth Dipping, but only Baptizing *, which
Word ( faith he ) Hefychim^ Stcphanus, Sca-
pula and Buchm, the great Mailers of the
Greek Tongue ) make good by very many
Iiaftances and Allegations out of Claflick
Writers, that the Word importeth no more
than Ablution or Wafting f>**-V£* /fay
they) in their Lexicons and Commentaries)
LavoyZtrff,"* Lav at io, Ablution, which may
be done without Dipping.

As touching the Greek Lexicon^ Pnblijljt and
Recommended byt

Jofeph Caryl, > Matthew Barker,

George Cokayne, ( I William Adderly,

Ralph Venning, ? j Matthew Mead,

William Dell, ) ( Henry Jefley.

All

C 79

All that I ftfcil ( oft need to ) fay, h thk
t>lt. that albeit I own my felf bound 'to
Reverence and Honour the hoary Head,
when found in the Way of Truth and
Rigbteonfnefs, yet it rmiit ftill be with tht
Refervation of the Honour and Refpecr.
'which I owe to God, ( that Ancient of days)
their Father and mine, who' alone and not
'the Learning and WifdomofMen (though
the greateit and holiejl j is the Father of
their Faith and mine. I am not inferable
[that fome Learned and igood Men have
granted, that the WordB*^, dodi indil-
'terentiy fjgnifie, any kind of Warning by
ipoumig out or fprinkling Water upon! or "
.?y dipping or plunging into the Water-
ed this they have grounded on the native
Ipmhcatjon of the Primitive Word u*w.
Mt with becoming Modefty and due Vene-
•ation to their Reverend Names, I mult
rave leave in- telling the World, that for a
ipjdl cannot be oftheir Opinion (here.
n; until I receive greater and clearer light
rom the Spirit and Word of God, concern-
ig this Matter- and that for. the Reafons *
ererollowing. Firft, the apparent di/Te-
nce I find between the two Words, B*V™

' x?r*7lh ln Letters and Syllables, let
& Words beobfervedm b*vt; r theft?
|itive; I can find but 2 Syllables, s.v£
^but in the Derivative, w^ 1 fi^
E three,

C 80 )

three, B*T--n-(>, Baftizo \ and as in the
Active, (To alia in the PafllveJ Voice ,-B*ttw-
^a/, Bap-to-mai hath three Syllables, where-
as B^-Ti-cVu^ which is the PafTive of B*x-
/ 7i(«, hath four Syllables, B^-rz-iV^ Bap-
ti-w-mai. Now that the 2 Words fhould
both in A&ivc and Paflive Voice fo appa-
rently differ in Letters, Syllables, and found
of the Words \ and yet that both the Words
Ihould fignifie and import the very fame
thing, is to me fuch a Riddle, that indeed
I cannot fee how the fame can be unfolded,
unlefs by the elucidating Art and Skill of
Dr. Rujfd. The Learned know (very well J
that in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues, the
Chanee of a Letter or a Syllable doth great-
ly alter the Senfc and Import of Words ;
and why it Ihould not be fo here, I cannot
fee anv folid Reafon to the contrary, only
it is the Will and Pleafure of our Dr. ( and
his Adherents in this Caufe ) that it mufr
and (hall be fo, right or wrong; as appears
by his Arminian Confidence almoft in even
Page where he mentions the Word Bap
tize- where he (peremptorily; begs th
Queition, taking for granted, that whicl
will never be granted by any, ( unleis b
Brainlefs Heads or wilful Undermincrs c
the Gofpel, fw'O that the Derivativ
B**rf^ doth always ( in the Gofpel ) fignif
and import the very fame thing with Baft

V4

C8i )

viz.. to Dip or Plunge the whole Body un-
der Water.
But that which will farther clear the mat-
j ter, and put the Truth ( I here contend for)
1 out of the reach of all Scriptural Contracft.
, ction, is the Pradice of the Holy Ghofr
: who is a better Etymologiit than our Dr'
I and then all the Arminian (and other Here-
tical) Criticks, who ( in pretence ofgivin?
j the Native and Genuine Senfe of Words m
| the Scripture » hare forc't a wrong Senfe
. trora the Original, on purpofe to lava
jfirm Foundation, on which they may build
jtheir Heterodox, and Soul deluding Do-
ctrines. 6

■ I find that when the HoJyjShfl&wogld
iflgreKtheAaof Dipping or PhSSjE".

&* v^ tJ5 eSliMiveB,^, that I can
had: For Proof whereof, let thole Serin-
aires quoted by the Dr. himfelf in Paee
n- j be without prejudice lookt into, and
eponflf weighed, Rev. ,9. 13 He hid hi
efiure a,pt ,„ Blood. Mat. 16. 2 1 . He that
uppetb hum„4 with me in the Dijh. Luke
[ ^ 24. k hat he may dip the tip of his Firmer
I* w"": And in ?ch„ 1 3. 2%. It is ( faith
)he Dr.) twice ufedlB^ Dipped^.
j*4*», md when he hxd Dtp fed : Here in

m Dip or Plunge mto by the Primitive

( 8* }
't^ivrw, but never by K*™Z»^Baptizjo> the
"Derivative.

Secondly, again on the contrary) when
the Holy Ghoit expreifeth Baptifm by
warning, he doth it by the Derivative £**-
77'^, but never by the Primitive ft-ht^ Bap-
to. For Proof hereof, let the places of
Scripture already quoted (out of Leigh's
Crir/ca Sacra) be confulted, in all which
places the Spirit fpeaks of Baptifm, but not
a VV ord of Dipping i and that by the Deii-
vative Word (^vfa, Bxm^o \ never by
the Primitive Bapto.

Seeing then it hath pleafed the Holy
GhohY'to exprefs Dipping or Plunging into
by the Word b*vi0) but never by the Word
ii*riihi*i Bufti^o • and that he hath exprciled
Baptilm by the Word **-^3 but ncvei
by the* Word b*™. I think none but Fools
or mm Men will blame me for refolving tc
believe the Holy Ghoft fin this matter) be-
fore 1 believe Dr. Rnjfd^ and all the humane
Tefiimonies he hath quoted to make gooc
his Caufe : though he were able to quote ;
Million ofAuthors as witty and learned a
hisfo much admired ScrvetmzvA Cafieliio.

1* he Premifes confidered, I hope th
Dr. will not be difpleafcd for making th
fair and generous OtFer to him, and all wh
cfp; ufe his Unfcripturai Caufe, ( vif. ) th;
it be. or thev, can Ihew fuch a folid an

cor

( 83 )

convincing Renfon' (as doth not contradict
the Analogie of Faith J why ( or wherefore)
the Holy Ghoit fhould nor in any cf thofe
Scriptures ( where he expreffcth Dipping .)
exprefs Dipping by b*t7«'(* the Derivative}
but only by b*V7» the Primitive }- and why-
he fhonld notexprefs Bap'tifm in any of the
places of Scripture above quoted, by the
Primitive b*j#<*, Bapto> but always by Bap-
tizo^ in cafe both s<V7» the Primitive^ and
Bxrii^a its Derivative do ilgnifie the very
fame thing, viz. to- Dip or Plunge under
the Water : And I do faithfully promife
him to own my felf mifcaken, and him to
be ( herein ) in the right.

If he cannot, I then hope his mifguided
Profelytes, as well as himfelf, will ingeni-
ouQy own them (elves miftaken^nd pcrflii no
longer infighting againil the Truth of God,

From the difference between the two
! Words in Letters, Syllables and Sound ^ as
lalfo from the Practice of the Holy Ghoit,
I in ufirig both the Words in the N. T.
| I thus argue, Major. If the Words b*V7»
(and Ba^i^ai do apparently differ in Letters^
I Syllables and Sound, and if the Holy Ghoit
i do always exprefs the A & of Dipping and
J Plunging by Bapto, never by Bamizo; and
tf aptifm by Bapnzo , never by Bapto ;
I then the Word Bapto mult ilgnifie to Dip
'and Plunge, but never to Baptize ^ and the
V - &-*i Word

C 34 )
Word Baptizo muft fignific to Baptize, but
never to Dip or Plunge under Water.

AiTump. But the Words Bapto and Bapti-
%o do apparently differ in Letters^ Syllables
and Sound-, and the Holy Ghoft doth always
exprefs the Jtt of Dipping or Vlungmi by
Bapto, never by Baptizo :, and Baptijm by
Baptizo, never by Bapto.

Condnfion, Erg o the Word Bapto mutt
fignific to Dip or Plunge, but never to Bap-
tize : and the Word Baptizo mult fignihe
to Baptize, but never to Dip or Plunge un-
der Water.

Befides this Argument, others thai! b:
laid down to confirm this when I come to
fpeak to his Third, viz. the Prafticc of the
firft Baptizers.

In the id. Place, our Dr. will have Bap-
tizing to be only by Dipping or Plunging
the whole body under Water: The Proot
heaivesfto make good his Attention here-
in J are thofe Metaphors ufed in Holy
Scripture : To reprefent it to our Under-
Handing, he inftances in two, in Page 3
iris. Burial and Refuvre&ion,

He tells his Reader there, that our Lord
Tefus hath not burthened us under the Gof-
pel with a Multitude of Ceremonies as 11
was in the Oeconomy of the Jews under tht
Leeal Difpenfation, but only with lorn-
few: and thofe very ilguifkant, this ban;
7 a mor«

C so

a more Spiritual Difpenfation. Before I
meddle in fpeaking to his Metaphors, I
will take Liberty to tell the World, that al-
beit Chrift doth not burden us with a mul£
titude of Ceremonies now , as under the
Oeconomy of the Jews under the Legal Dif-
penfation ^ yet this one Ceremony/of Bap-
tifm) will pro_ye a heavier Yoke toBeljevers
now than Circumcili^w[dia]Itiie^hoIeBO'
djof Ceremonies appertaining to that Legal
Difpenfation, ii^cafe it mull be adminiftred
b^Dipphi^ and„£Lungirigthe whole Body
wader Water, as Anabaptifts fey it mutt.

I corns now to his Metaphors, the fit ft'

whereof, he faith, is that of a Burial: For

this, he and all of his Perfwafion quote Kam.

6* 4 and Colof. 2. 12. Buried with him in

JBaptifm urn* Death, From this Metaphor

of a Burial the Dr. and all his Pax ty do hold :

and teach { for an infallible Truth ) that the

Scope and Defign of the Apoftle in the two

places (now quoted) is to teach and fet forth

the Mode and Manner how Chrift was tap*

ried,, to the end Believes fh&uld ( in Bap-

tifm ) imitate the fame : This ( if I miilake

I them not, as I am very confident I do not)

: is the Senfe and meaning wherein he and all

; Anabaptifts take thofe Scriptures.

In anfwei: to whom, I affirm that this

their fenfe of thofe places is fenfelefs, and

J meerly foicft -to. ferve their own turn, in

E . 4 . proving

( 86 )

proving that Dipping and Flunking (in
Baptifm > is the only true and right Baptifro.

Now to ctifcover their Miitake and Error
herein, I (hall offer but two things to Con-
iid era lion.

The firli is, to (hew the "Scope one! De-
sign of the ApolHe m thofe places, which
is not ; as they fondly and iisjudicicttfly ima-
gine ) to Ihevv that Chrift was baptized by
dipping, or that believers are to be fo bap-
tized- ,

But the Scope and Defign of the Apoflle
In thofe places, is to fet forth and prove
that Suretyship Union, which is between
Chrift ( the Mediatorial Head ) and all the
Members of his Kody Myflical^ there be-
ing no ohe Act of Obedience, either Active
or Pa(Kve3 which Chiiir, ( the Mediator )
'performed m the aiTmrie'ch Nature, but all
his Members are laid to do and perform
the feme, and all the Effects and faving
Benefits thereof do undoubtedly redound
to all the Eleft : and all this is fignified and
fealed in Baptifm to every el eoted Sinner,
whether Infant or Adult. And I cannot but
reckon it a ftrange Infatuation on thofe who
lay fuchitrefs on the Dutch Tranilators, ia
the point of John the Dobpif, ( wherein
ijlly and weak People do not a little glory
and brag that they fhouid put fucrr Sleights
and Contempt on the Dutch Annotacors,

thofe

there great Lights of 'th^ World, in matter

©f Infants Right to Baptifm, of 'Abraham's

Covenant being a Covenant of ' abiblute*

Grace, of Circumoiiionv being the .Initial

t Seal thereof, and Baptifnvfucceeding in the.:

Irdbrri thereof--, with fnndry other material'

■points in .Gofpel Religion*, .wherein ■.-t.hejr

are found and orthodox : Yet, in .nothing

1 mufi our Dr. and his Adherents make ale. of \

\ the Dutch ^ only 'John the Doopery John-^i^:

\Dooftr: And in this Com nnfiion,. de Snh&:

I Dopcnde, Dipping them.

And. what ground hath our- :Dr. to* qon—
| elude, that had our - .Englifo Tranjlatar* >
I turned the Words (about; Baptifm J int<*>
Dipping, as the Dutch tTranJlators have -
; done ? ( If it be as- he faith ) that therefore.:-
Jit mull: (neceilarily ) be fo in the Original^,
; or how will, he prove the Dutch Tra?jJUt&rf-<
| nearer to Infallibility than our Tvglijlj 'iVar^
^fiators were? or that our Eiigu^ Trarij
tors would have been more infallible than-
they were, in cafe they had Tranilatecii
John the %anifi^ Johamcsd^Doafsr^ and ir\ i
the QommitTion: Baptizing ^hem9 d&jralvs-Dcf-
fcnder Dipping them.
« Secondly,; If to imitate .'anctefet;^ foi0\
€hrift;s: Burial, be the ©eiigis ofeth^Ai^
|fe then mufi it ( neceilarily ;.> follow, tha£i
■it is- Mens Duty to* -imitate it irrailtheC
$ftgi&fif«Sf€f4 Burial, as w.all as ij^|ff§s

$:%.. mmi

C 88 )

Chf ift when he was buried, he was whol-
ly Pafliye} he did not go into the Grave
himfelf,but was laid in by others; fo muft.
Perfons be in Baptifm, they muft be wholly
Paffive, they mult not go into the Water
themfelves, but muft be laid tinder the Wa-
ter by the Adminiftration of Baptifm : Chrift
when buried was left in the Grave, fo mult
the Perfon in Baptifm *, he muft be left un-
der the Water as long as Chrift continued
in the Grave, which was three Days and
three Nights.

If any ihali lay it is abfurdand ridiculotfs
to think or fay, that thefe Circumitances
fhould be attended or imitated by Believers
in Water Baptifm, I fay fo too •, and do
farther fay acd affirm, that it is ( altoge-
ther) as ab-furd and ridiculous for any to
affirm and teach, that for Believers to fet
forth and imitate Chrift's Burial is the Apo-
ftiesDefign in the above-mentioned Scrip*
tures ? If Anabaptifts will be peremptory
in averting and teaching that to fet forth
*ad imitate Chrift's Burial ia thofe places^
is the Scope and Deiign of the Apoftte, they
jHiufi give me leave to be as peremptory as
they in affirming, that unlefs they imitate
Chrift's Burial in the Circumitances now*
mentioned, their Baptifm ( about which fa
great and confeted a Noife is made in the
Wbrldy is but a meer ludicrous (or mock)

Baptifm*

(m )

B^tifm, for that they do not imitate Chrift
in their Baptifm in thafe Circumitances
which are fo ellentially neceiFary to let
forth and repreient his Deathand Burial, in
cafe it be as they hold it is* ...

To which I add, that our Baptizjngby '
pouring out or fprinkling,_Wa£er-Oir^the
Subject, doth (every way;)- nwre^exa&ly .
reprefent and fet forth a Burial, than that
of digging and plunging, the-- whole Body .'
under Water.

The Truth of this will appear, if the Par-.
ticnlars following be feriouily and without
Prejudice confidered.

Watcry the Patty teptized is A&hrg? ife •

going himfelf into the. Water, which (rh*~ *
deed) ought not ta be the Ordinance of -
Water.. Baptifro, being (in all refpeclcs j a ^
Pajjve^ Ordinance, wherein, the Subject isj
to be wholly Paffive t as the Soul is in the..
Work. ojOkgeneratibn.

The Work or Converlion or Regenera- m

tion is the Inward and Spiritual Baptifm ..*,

Adminiftred. by Chrift. In. this wonderful.;

Work,, the Dead Sinner hath no hand m ,

I effe&ing or producing the fame, it is wftot- ]

<:Iydoneby Chrift, the Ad mini Orator there- ]

I of. So m the outward Ordinance of Wa-

i ter-Baptifrrfc, (which is m more: than, She I

\ autvwrd Sign, or Seal of the Inward") the ;

Maiftgr »'

( <*> )

MiniCer oc the Gofpel ia Admim[ln
Baptifm ) mull only be Active, the Subject
mull puc forth no Act at all. The Party
going himfelf into the Water, doth not
reprefent and let forth a Dead Man : la
pouring out or fprinkling Water on the
Subject, the Party is "wholly pTUve, as is a
Dead Man when buried. Again, in_Dip-
pi Bg jand Phjnging, the Parly bapiizid is
appTyedjq J _b e YVater , no t t h e W a ter jp
the Fa rtx, which is contrary to the man-
ner of Burials, which ail Men} now is to
jay the Corps on its 8 ck in the Grave, and
to pour out or fprinkie the E nth on it.

Jn baptizing by fprinkling or pouring out
Water, the Party is laid on his back, and the
Water poured out or fprinlyled on him.

The Party Dead is never thruft into the
Earth, but the Earth or Mould is poured
out .on him.

. Now, whether of thefe tw:o ways of bap-
tizing by dipping and plunging, or that
of Pouring out or Sprinkling Water up *
on, do more lively and exaftly fct forth
and reprefent a Burial, -let any (who have
not loft their Senfes ) judge.

As to the Second Metaphor^ ( viz.. ) A,
Refiiirrection, I humbly conceive, that what
here follows may fuffice to mew, th;t as
A.nabaptifts do not ( at all ) hold forth or
xeprelent rM Death and Burial of. Chrift ia

their

( »i 3

tbeir going into the Water, hi their way )
fo needier do they fee torch and reprefent
his ReturrecYton, as they fancy they do.

Firsts It is molt certain, that when the
time . determined by God's Decree i for
ChriU's remaiui.ng. ifi a State of Death was
accompli Git, , ( according to the Holy Scrip-
tures ; he rakred up himfelf fom the
Grave. No hand of Men; or Angels-helpc
to raiie him. . So that plain it is, if the
Scriptures' they all edge for this, be to be
t.^ken in a literal Senfe, then mull it needs
follow, that as he that Adminiilers Bap*
tifm , by Dipping, or ."Burying the whole
Body under Water, ) doth Adminifrer Bap*
tifm in that way of Burying under the Wa-
ter, to the end the Party, fo. Baptized
might lively fet forth the Death and Burial
of "Chrift v & he muff, leave the Party Buri-
ed in the Water, to raife up himfelf, that
fo he might rep relent Chrilt'in his railing
up himfelf from the Grave.. If this were
pra&ifed, it would not be hard to guefs,
how many Profelytes they would get to
join with them in! this their Fantaflical new
Mode of Baptizing. And truly, for my
part, I cannot fee how they can be excufed
from doing the. one as well- as the other,
feeing that the' Metaphor muft be profe-
cuted in all its pariv as weQ as in fome.
And 'thus they may fee, wfcat they are life
• ' to

\ yz j
to get, by building their Confidence on
mifunderitood and wrefted Metaphors.

I come now to the Do&or's Third Medi-
um, whereby he labours to prove, that the
right way of Baptising under theGofpel,
is{ and muft be ) by Dipping and Plunging
the whole Body under Water, ( vlt* ) The
Practice of the firft Baptizers. In this ha
is as full of Confidence as he was in the o-
ther two, I have now difmift \ and I hope,
in the Good nefs of God it will plainly be.
demonftrated, that ( in this alia) he and
his Adherents do pervert the Scriptures,,
which gives us the Account of the • firft Rap-
tizers, as they (moft certainly ) do the o-
ther Scriptures, which they bring to jtJiti-
fie and make good their Soul deluding.
Dreams*

He begins with John the Baptis%Vage ic
where he tells his Reader, that it doth ap*
pear that Dipping is the right way of Bap-
tizing from the firft Baptizers } The firft
mention ( faith he ) of this Ordinance of Ho-
ly Baptifm, we have in Mat. %g-u where
John the Dipper is mentioned^ and lb he-
goes on in a ftrarige kind of Rapfcdyr
warbling out his fo much affefted Note,,
Dipping and Plunging. I Avail not be con-
cerned to follow the Dr. ( Pedctentim > ftefr
by ftep in his Pedantkk way,, leaft I fhoulS
be found guilty of the lame empty Tauto-

&£jes>

C 91 )

logics wherewith his fo much admired E-
piltle abounds.

The ground of his Miftake herein, is the
wrong Etymology he gives of the Word
b*ttiV«, which he and his mistaken Tefti-
rnoriies take to lignifie and mean Dipping
and Plunging the whole Body under Wa-
ter.

This Etymologie of his I have over-
thrown, as the Reader may fee7 if he look
back to the fir ft Head of the Diipute, viz,
the Etymologie of the Word saTT,£». I (halt
not repeat but go on to confirm the Truth,
of theEtymologie I have given' of the Word
**%"^ from the Word of God, and the
belt Greek Authors, by fuch Arguments as
( I hope in Chrift ) will prove irrefragable.

The firft (hall' be grounded on the necef-
fity of John Baptifi, his harmonizing with
the Pen-Men of the Old TeftammmzYL the
parts of his Miniftry, if the Dr. will grant
( as he muft ) if he fpeak Truth that his
John the Dooper was a true and faithful Pro-
phet of God, he muft of necefllty grant thai:
'John did run parallel with Mofis and the o»
ther Prophets.

This the Dr. muft either grant or deny,.
if he grant that fohn did run exactly paral-
lel with Mofis and the other Prophets*
then it is beyond all Contradiction that
John adminiltred Baptifm'-by pouring out

or

( n -)

or iprinkling Water on the Perfons' he
baptized ^ for mod certain it isr that Moles
,( under the Ceremonial Difpeniation ) did
apply all the LegalWafhingsand r'urifica-
tions by Water, { which all had a Typical
relation to Chrkt to come, as Johns Cap-
tion alfo had by pouring out or iprinkling
the Water: The Prophets aifo (witnefs
thofe two great Prophets Ifa. and Ez.ek. )
they foretold of the manner how God would
apply to his People the two great Benefits
accrewing by his Sons Mediatorial Sacrifice,
'{yi^S) jalliiication and Sanctiiication, which
was to be by iprinkling, as will evidently
appear by Jfa. 52. 1 j. Then fljall he fyrinkk
wavy Nations, &c. and Ezek. 36. 25. Then
will I fprinkle clean Wzter upon yqu7 &c.
In thefe places the Spirit of Chrilt ( in his
Prophets) had an Eye to the Baptifmal
Warnings of the NewTeframent Diipenfa-
tion. Now if John Baptift did ( in all the
parts of his Miniftry ) harmonize with
Mojfis and the other Prophets, he did ( un-
doubtedly J baptize by pouring out or
iprinkling Water on thofe he baptized \
for molt certain it is, (as hath been already
obferved ) pouring out or fpriakling was
the Mode or Way. of Application of a 13
the Ceremonial Warnings which were ufed
before John\ Baptifm.
If the Dn and his Adherents- deny, that

John

(95 )
Joh# did run ( exactly) parallel with Mo\ts
arc.d the other Pen -men of Holy Scriptures,
then is John the Docftr ( by them) made a
falfe Prophet- and ail who ( from >ofof.)
take up and praetife the Mode of Dipping
the whole Body under Water, ( as the only
right Baptifai ) are felf-condemned in that
they do ( herein ) follow one who contra-
dicted the Spirit of God in the: other Pro-
phets.

And fo ( hereby ) it appears how- much
John the Baptift is obliged to the Dippers
of our Age, who (rather than they will
lofe their filly Opinion > will have the Spi-
rit of Truth to fpeak Nonfenfe, ( yea, con-

| tradicl: himfelf ) and John the greater! of all
the other Prophets ( becsuil- the immedi-

| ate fore-runner of Chrifl ) to be a falfe Pro-

Iphet.

This Stain they will never be able to

Iwafh off their Name, any other way .than

;by hoiiefriy acknowledging, that John did
f m all the parts of his^Minifrry ) harmo-
nize with M)firai$x?az other Prophets;
the which if they once grant, (as they tnnft
if they fpesk by the Holy Ghoft ) then is
their Caufe FoiT, and John np more to be
Stiled Jolm- the Boopcr7 but Joi»tfi5 Bap-
pizer,

I f From 77 hat hath been Paid;, I argue thus,
B J&m Bkp0 did (in all the parts of his

il . Mini-

(9<5 )

Miniftry ) harmonize and agree with Mo-
fes and the other Prophets, then did he
Adminifter Baptifm by pouring out or
fprinkling Water upon thofe he baptized :
But John Baprift did ( in all the parts ©f his
Miniftry ) harmonize and agree with Mo*
fes and the other Prophets.

Therefore Jchn Baptift did Adminifter
Baptifm by pouring out or fprinkling Wa-
ter on thofe he baptized.

A fecond Argument (hall be grounded on
Impoffibility, thus: That way of baptizing
which is impoffible to be praetifed ( without
a miraculous Strength of Body ) was never
commanded by Chrift , nor pra&ifed by
John v but to baptize the many Multitudes
which came to John's Baptifm, by Dipping
the whole Body under Water, was a thing
altogether impoffible, feeing John had na
miraculous Strength of Body to render him
capable of fuch an arduous and difficult Ad-
miniftration.

Therefore that way of Baptizing, by
Dipping the whole Body under Water, was
never commanded by Chrift, nor practifed

by John.

The major Proportion will not be deny-
ed,the A ilumption will readily b^fubfcrir
bed, (as an unqueftionable Truth ) if Men
who plead for that way of Dipping will be
but ingenious in doing two things, Firfl,

in

C 97 )

in lifting up in their Arms ( cleverly from
the Earth) the many Corpulent Bodies
which offer ihemfelves to Baptifm, lay
them under the Water, and there hold
them until the Adminiftrator pronounce
the Words of Inflitution, / Baptize thee in
the Name of the Fat her , efthe Son, and of
the Holy GhoSh Secondly, in fincerely ac-
knowledging what Experience teaches
them concerning this Practice ; thefe two
Particulars comply'd in, will ( 1 doubt not)
put the matter now in Debate out of aB
j Queftion, that to baptize in that way of
| taking up in the Arms, and laying under
I Water the moil Corpulent Bodies who of-
fer to Baptifm, and to hold them under
! the Water till the Words of Initiation be
pronounced*, is a thing altogether impof-
i fible, not only in refpeel of the Admini-
ftrator, whofe bodily Strength mull (in
i an ordinary way) (Ink and fail in lifting and
| holding up ( fo long ) fuch maffy, ponde-
rous Weights : And alfo in refpeft of the
Subject, who mull (undoubtedly ) be ia
great Fear and in apparent Danger of be-
ing let fall, if not of being fuffocated or
fmothered in the Water.

And ftrange it is to me, that Arniinians
| who plead fo much for the univerfal Love
land Mercy of God to Mankind ( in gene-
pi, ) fnouid not fee. how full of Reflection
''! : on

C 98 )

on God, this Principle of theirs is, which
makes the God of Love and Mercy, the Au-
thor of fuch a Mbde or Way of baptizing,
which is not pofTible to be pradtifed, with-
out apparent Danger, both to Health -and
Life, of both the Subject and the Admini-
ftrator too.

i conclude this Argument with the Say-
ing of judicious Sydenham, viz. That if
haptifm be to be Admini fired in that way of
Dipping only, happy are thofe who live in hot
Climates, or who have Bodies of Bra fs.

h Third Argument may be grounded on
Scandal, thus •, That Mode or Way of Bap-
tizing, which is both immodeft, and tends
to excite luftful Motions and carnal De-
flees in Men -and Women* cannot be com-
manded by Chrift •, neither was the fame
ever pra&i fed by John. But that way of
baptizing by dipping the whole. Body un-
der Water, is both immodeft, and tends to
excite luflfr.i Motions and carnal Deilres
in Men and Women.

Therefore that Mode of baptizing by
dipping the whole Body under Water, was
never commanded by Chrift, neither was
the fame ever practrfed by lohm

Ke who commands all Matters ( relating
to Divine Worlhip ) to be done decently,
and in order, 1 Cor. 14. 40. and who com-
mands Believers- to abftain from all Ap^;

93 1

'ttrf ! °I5wJt - ,/7j<-' v "• car> never

be the Autnor ol fueh diibrderly Praftifes

as thwart and contradid his own general

Hules Now, whether it be not an Im-

-tnodelt and nnfeemiy Sight, to fee a mixt

Company of Men and Women Hand in Gar-

1 ments, ( to ufe Mr. Sy^Ws Expreffion )

; nexttoNakednefskfclf: Let any(not H

reavdof common Mcdefty J judge • ArH

; Whether the Admin iftrator can . r poffiblv?

handle the Female Sex, as he doth ( when

i anally dipping them, ) and not feel the

j Rifings and Motions of Concupifcence in

I his Nature- I leave to thinking Perfon"

; to determine and judge.

i Again, in the Fourth place, (to add no

!«ore) letthe laft Argument'be bounded

on the Analogic, which is (and mult be )

.between Uie Baptifm of J«hn and that of

I it A -IK Argimentis thus framed.

If Chnlt's Way and Manner of Admini-
fe! th^yard-Spiritnal Baptifm(whe?e-
! o| that of John was but the Outward Vifi-
lbleSignj.be by- fpr inkling or pouring ont
i upon : then john did ( certainly ) b prize
by fpnnkling or pouring out the Water,
on thofe he baotized :

nilrinST5 Wa7cand- Manner of Admi.

rv"& w* niwaia spiritual 13a
ipnjiKlijig or pouring out upon."

There-

:'

C *co )

Therefore ]ohn did ( certainly ) baptize
by fprinkling or pouring out Water on
thofe he baptized.

If there was a Necefllty that ]ohn fhould
harmonize with Mofis , the Ceremonial
Law, and the Prophets, I cannot fee any
Reafon why he mould not be as greatly con-
cern'd to harmonize with Chrift himfelf :
And feeing that the manner of Chrift's
Adminiftring the Inward and Spiritual
Baptifm, is by Pouring out and Sprink-
ling the Graces of the Spirit upon the
Souls of the Eleft in the Work of Regene-
ration, why ]ohn (the fore -runner of Chrift)
mould Adnuniller his Baptifm ( which was I
but an External Sign of Chrift's ) t>y Dip-
ping or Plunging the whole Body into the
Water, can never be demonftrated by all
the Wit and conceited Skill in our Do-
dor, though he were as well verft in all the
Roots and^Heemantiqne Nouns of the He-
brew Tongue, as his fo much admired Ro-
bcrtfon was : And if the Doctor will not
be offended, I am very defirous to know it
his fo highly commended and admired Ro-
hcrtfon was ( by his fo great Excellency in
the Hebrew and Greek Tongues ) more In-
fallibly acquainted with the Mind of the
Holy.Ghoft then other Men •, and that Mr.
Robertfon did certainly believe, that the
f Etyme-

C ror )

Etymology, which he gave of the Word Bap-
t:zx>, was infallible as he fa id. How came
it to pafs, that the Learned Robert fa did
not renounce that Baptifin, which" he re-
ceived in Infancy and by Sprinkling >

I think I knew Matter William Robert fa
as well as Dr. Ruff.I^ and during the time
or my Acquaintance with him, I am fure
he was far enough from Anabaptifm. All
t.ie Skill he had in the Toneues, with his
Acquaintance in the Arts, did not convince
him, that the Baptifm he received in In-
thfk ind ^fpriflkling, was a Nullity, as
the Dodtor holds it is.

But to return to John the JDooper , I
think fit to allure the Dorter, that I own
myielt bound to believe John himfelf, ra-
ther than Doftor Rujfel, or any oi thofe
learned men he fo greatly brags of. The
Woras oHofeare fo plain, that I can fee
no need of a Commentator to explain their
Senfe • he tells us in Mar. i. 8. and in Mat.
3- ii. that he did baptize with Water-
but that Chrift mould baptize with the
ynolt : a, .-.r *ti and <* «Wj*w« *y„, ^o both
intend and fignifie the very fame way and '
manner of Adminittration: All the difie-
jrence between John and Chrift, in both
Jtlieir Baptifms, is in the fubjefc Matter
JflWfe-In the outward Water and the inward
urace: John he did Adminiiler Water,

the

( ioi ).
the outward Sign ; but'Chrifl: he did A'dmi-
nifter the Spiritual Grace : but as touching
the manner, it was ( moft certainly ) the
very fame In both.

Now, if the Doctor grant, fas he muft
if he fpeak- Truth J "that Chriftdoth Admi-
nifter" the Inward and Spiritual Baptifm
by Pouring out or Sprinkling the Graces
of the Holy Ghoft, he will find it "(altoge-
ther) incongruous, and no' way agreeing
with the Analogic of Faith, to hold or af-
fert, that ]ohn did Admi nifter the out-
ward Sign in fuch a manner as was dire&ly
contrary to Chrift. There mult be ( nccef-
farily ) an harmonious Agreement between
the Sign and the Thing fignified thereby,
which can never be, in cafe Chrift Baptizes
by or with, Pouring out or Sprinkling •
and )ohn fhould Baptize by Dipping 01
Plunging into. %

i As Chr ill applies the Graces of the Spirit
| to the Soul in Converfion, not the Soul to
•the Spirit*, fo in the outward Baptifn
] Urn he apply -d the Water ( the outwavc
: Sign ) to the Perfon, not the Perfon to th

,J Water. .

For making the Thing or Point ( now u
Debate ) obvious and plain to the meaner!
Capacity, let it be ferionfly coniidered
bow plain and exprefs the Scriptures are ii
affirming, that Chrift's Way or Manner h

Adm-

(-I03 )
Admimftnng the Spiritual Baptifin," is bj
Pouring out and Sprinkling the Holy Spi-
rit on the Serais, which he regenerates-
but never by applying the Souls to the Ho-
ly Spirit, read ( without Prejudice ) Tit.
3. ifc 6. Not by Works of Righteoujnefs, which
we have done, but according to his Mercy, he
hath javed m by the rvafiwg of Regeneration
and the renewing of the. Holy Ghost, which hi
fced on w abundantly, through Jefus Chrifi
our Saviour.

?t&0 h'*f**t, hath powered on us, the
srery lame Word is made ufe of in Alls 2.
\q And it fha/lcome to faff in the laft Days,
path God ) / will pour Cut my Spirit on all

Both which places are the fulfilling of thofe
-iracious^ Promifes in Ifa. 44. 3. and JW
t. 28. wnere the Lord promi'fed, that he
p pour Water on him that is thirfty
re. and his Spirit on the Churches Seed!
the Hebrew Word In Ifa. is, 'On< >nn
m^Ritchh aHdinJof/theWorduied toex-
reis toe fame thing by is, »np HK Tiatoj* ■
moch Etb Ruchi: in neither of which
laces will our Doftor's care* )^!^
fc '*OtW : And Dip ye them, befc-id.
jhe PoftoT, the better to help his timfc
ig Profelytes over the Style of Herel
| Error, tells his Reader that the Evan-
jPt -A^/^jp wrote his Gofpel in the .4-

( io4 )

brew Tongue; for Proof whereof, he fet<

down his own Opinion, that lb it is :, ark

"this Opinion of his he confirms (as infalli

ble) by the Teftimony of jerom, and ( h<

thinks ) the Opinion of the rooft Learnet

Men: But the Dr. was lb wary in th'i

point, that he refolved the Reader fhouk

not ( eaiily) find him out in his Quota

tions, the which the Doctor knew woulc

eafily be done, had he (fairly ) dire&fe

his Reader to the Book and Page in ]erom

where his Judgment concerning this matte

is expreft, and by naniingthe Learnec

Men, who were one with him and ]ero>

in this Opinion : His Negkd herein force

me to charge him with Untairncfs, ( to fa

noworfe) if that be a true Rule in Logics

Dolus latet in Vnh'crjaUbt-u, that Deceit Ik

hid in Univerfals .-, I am fure the Do&o

( as well as the reft of his Fraternity, wh

frequently walk in this Path) mnft fell in

der this Laih •, the Drs. Lothncfs to nan

the Learned Men who were of his Opir

on in this, caufes me to fufpcd that

means fuch as his Learned Baptift Strum

. and his famous Ciftcflio, with thole oth

Armlnlan and Pofiflt Authors, whofe Nam

are in his Book.

It were worth while for the Readei
obferve what fhifts the poor Man is put
to prove and make good (from God's Wo

C *°s )

,j Ins new, C though falfly pretended ancient)
' Mode of baptizing, by Dipping and Plun-
ging the whole Body into the Water.
He tells his Reader that Matthew wrote
; his Gofpei in Hebrew • the Drs. Dellen
, .being ( no doubt ) to make way for his H-.
'brew Words, Dms T>3Wl W ^ „
i ftm The root, faith he, is TaM. whi^
is the third Perfon Singular of the Preter-
jer feci Ten fe, and fignifies he Dipped- He
■: Pittances in Naaman the Syrian, z Kit,£t r
1 14. Then went he down and Dipped kiWelf
\fevtn times in Jordan, <fc. From iV„
the Synan the Dr. comes ( per fdtnm ) bv a
ilong leaptoJo/;» Baptizing in Jordan ,^a
j^« .3. 6 you have, faith hVthe fame
Words -again -in the Pafir/e Voice, which
nuft be rendred in Englifi, And wire it
\ed of hm m Jordan: And in Ver. 16. you
iiave the fame ,-00t again as i(. is j- ^

m Saviour, ^Je> whm he '&£%£*
"entup ftraightway out of the Water. **

'■1 /erD^talCS SrSranted> that becaufe
*U fignifies he Dipped, and that becaufe
famon Cm- the place above quoted) Dip-
* h.mfelf in J.r^. that therefore fn
J«fe* it muft needs be Feubeh, ola*
\d Dye them; and that John did dip all
^Baptized, over Head and Ears in >!

Am

( io6 )
Am I bound to believe that Matthew did
write bis Gofpel in Hebrew, becaufe the
Dr is of the Opinion he did?

Or, muft I therefore grant it becaufe
Jcrom is of his Opinion ? though neither
Jerom nor he gives any folid Reafons for that
their Opinion. '

Two things convince me that both jerom
the Dr. and "his pretended Learned Men
were all miftaken in this their Opinion.

Firth, I find ( by Reading ) that the Gof
pel which Matthew isfuppofed to have writ
ten in Hebrew was never yet feen by an
Author, and therefore I muft mind him c
the Maxim, as true and applicable in th
prefent cafe, De mn apfaretitibui, & non ex
iftentibus eadem eft Ratio, of things not ap
pearing, and ot things not exiftrog, thei
is the fame Reafon to be given. ;

Secondly, If Matthew had written h
Gorpel in Hebrew, he would not ha\<
translated into Greek the Word Emmamu
in Mat. i. 23. andthofe whole Sentence
Eli, Eli, Lamma Sabatthani, in Mat. Z

46But fuppofe I (hould (for Argument Jake
want, which I utterly deny, and cnallem
the Dr. to make good that Matthew 1*
Written his Gofpel in the Hebrew Ton&
doth it therefore follow ( neceflanly ) th
the Holy Ghoft, (who is fo exact and pr

( ro; )
cife in choodng the moil apt and fit Words
' whereby to exprefs his Mind ) fhould ufe
the Hebrew Word ^2& Tabal, which ligni-
£es to Dip, and not theWord ^n"| Rachatz.,
which fignlfies to Walh, or D3D Kibbem^
"which fignifies the fame: I have^ already ■
-demonftrated from the Word of God, that
in all the places of the New-Teftament
where the Holy Ghoft makes mention of
Baptifm, he doth it by the Derivative ?***>-
1% which fignifies to Warn, by Pouring out
or Sprinkling Water .upon, but never by
the Primitive **«««», Bapo% which fignifies
; to Dip or Plunge into : And when the Holy
iGnofb exprefleth the Ad of Dipping or
; Plunging into, he doth it by the Primitive
BiVt*, which fignifies to Dip into, but ne-
ver by the Derivative w<>, which fignifies
Wb Warn with • by which it plainly appears
;( to me at lead; that rather than the Do-
ctor will lofe his Credit, and fufferhis rot-
;ten Caufe to be loft, he will rather open
door to the old Babel Confufion of Tongues
refolvmg f Jefuit like) to fet the Pen-Men
of Holy Scripture together by the Ears,
and impofe on his credulous Reader a real
Belief, that what the Holy Ghoft hath laid
down ( and plainly expreft ) m Greek, he
hath gainfaid and contradicted in Hebrew •,
(which Contradiction, can never befal the
pen-Men of the Holy Scripture, nor ( with-
F 3 out

C &>$. )

Biafpbemy ) be charged on that Hoi;
Spirit, by which they were Acted and in
failibly Infpired.

The Reafon which Jerom gives whj
Matthew wrrit his Gofpel in Hebrew, vrz
for the Sake of thofe }ews which believed
is no Reafon at all •, for had it been the Wi:
of God it mould be fo, I know no Reafor
why Peter, J ame s and Paid, ( who all thre<
wrote to the Jews which believed J fhoulc
write in Greek, not in Hebrew ^ witnef
the two Epifcles of Peter, the Epiftle o
James, and that of Paul to the Hebrews.

The Dr. pleafeth himfelf in telling hi'
Reader , that in Mr. William Robert fan"
Hebrew New Teflament , he finds thef
Words between the 1 8 f A? and i$th Vzvte
(of Mat. a 8. he means) And as my Fa the
hath f en t me, even [o alfo J fend you. Goy
therefore, &c.

Thefe Words he fets down in the Hcbrer
Character, telling his Reader that he find'
them not in any Greek Copy.

An Argument thinks he) that Mattbcr
wrote his Gofpel in Hebrew j#a meer Non\
feqnitnr\ What though thofe Words be nc
in Matthew, 1 hope he vviil not deny tira
they are in Jo. 20. 21. there the Spiri
of God hath recorded them ; and why th
Dr. mould look to find them in Matthew !
know no Reafon, or wherefore his Learnec

Frien

( too )
Friend- Mr. Robert Con fhould take on him to
place, the Words recorded by Jo/w, be-
tween the t%th and \gth of Mat. z8. I can-
not conceive. But whatever moved Robert-
fon to fo prefumptuous an Ad, in taking
on him to alter things of this Nature, (as
if by his Skill ( in the Hebrew Tongue ) he
thought himfelf -able to re&ifie the Order
'in which the Holy Ghoft hath fet down his
own Mind in Writing ) I doubt not but the
Dr, was well pleafed with To palpable an
Aberration •, and all for the Loveand Liking
]he hath to his ^§*3 Tabal^ he Dipped, and
^"TChl Velammadit, Dilciple ye. By what
I have faid, it is eafie to judge, that could
the Dr. but have his Will in two things.
firft, that the Word b^i^«> Baptizo, doth
alway fignifie the very fame thing with its
Primitive b^t*.

• And Secondly^ that Matthew did write
his Goipel in~the Hebrew Tongue, and
that the: Words DrNK ftSBl Vetabelu
\jtham7 and Dip ye them, were the very
Words' of Matthew. All the Arc in Men
and Angels could never hinder but that
Dipping the whole Body under the Water
muft needs be the only right way of admi-
niltring the outward Bapiifm.

But both thefe (on* which he erects
Sis tottering Structure of Anabaptifm ) I
jftttrly disny^anddo fairly offer, and -fin-
F *f cerety .

C no )

cerely promife him, that if he can confute
fby God's Word) the Arguments laid dowr
to prove him miftaken in both, I will forth-
with Renounce my Baptifm received in In
fancy and by Sprinkling, as a meer Nullity
and not. only To, but I will in Pulpit ant
Print too, Declare ( to the World ) that 3
am fully convinced that Dipping the whol*
Body (under Water ) is the only right wa\
of adminiftring Water-Baptifm under the
New Teftament tDifpenfation.

And this, ( I hope with the Offer mad*
him, in clearing up the Etymology of the
Word kapt&jo ) will prove as generous ai
Offer as he made to Matter ]ames.

As touching what is ( ufually ) obje&ec
from Mat. 3. 1 6. concerning ChrihVs co
wing up out of the Water. And fron
Ails 8. $8t 39. concerning Philip and th<
Eunuch going down into, and coming U]
again out of the Water *, I need fay bu
two things..

Fir ft ^ For any to affirm ( politively
what the Word of God affirms not, is (t(
me) a fure Argument of an Ignorant, Raf!
and' Prefumptuous Spirit. Reader , marl
the Words : And^efvu, when he was Bap
tized, went up ftraightway out of ( Gree1
^ not ik, from not out of) the Wate>
The Text doth not fay, ( in downrigh
Terms ) that Chrift was. Dipt under th

WTater

Cm )
Water ; neither doth it appear from j4EIs
1 6. 38, 39. that the Eunuch was Dipt, on-
ly the Doctor ( and his Adherents ) will
have it to be fo, right or wrong.

Secondly^ There is nothing more certaia
than that a Perfon may be faid ( properly
enough) to go down into the Water
though he go not in above Shooe ( or An~
cle ) deep, which (I doubt not) waspra-
difed by both John and by Philip in the
places abovenrentioned - and that for -the
-better convenieacy of catching hold of the
Water with their Hands, in order to. fprin?
-"Me or pour out the fame on ■ thofe. they
Baptized.

And tliat which may convince any Many
T not prepofleft with Prejudice againft the:
Truth I here contend for ) that this was the
j Pra&ice of ]ohn, and all the firffc Baptizers,
!(fo much brag'd of by the Dr. ) is the Ira-
ipoffibility of the Spirit's- being the Author
of any (though the leaft ) Coatradi&ioB.:
jinany part of God's Worlhip.

Hence I argue. That which can no way
be prov'd or made good by exprefi Tefti*
mony of God's Word, or deduced there-,
from byTound (and neceflary) Confeq«encev
is an Invention in God's Worfhip, whicfc"
IjGod' will reject and abominate as not ap«-
tinted by him.

E-5 • M-

( tit )

But Dipping the whole Body under Wa-
ter in Baptifm, can no way be prov'd o:
made good by exprefs Teftimony of God';
Word, nor yet by found ( or neceflary
Confequence deduced therefrom.

Therefore Dipping tfye whole Body un-
der Water ( in Baptifm ) is an Invention ir
God's W or fhip, which God will reject anc
abominate, becaufe not appointed by him.

The major Propofition will not be de
nied. That which fecuresthe minor, anc
proves the Con clu (ion to be the Truth
( which all the Wit of the Adverfary wil
never be able to prevail a gain ft ) is tfa
Scriptures Silence, in that it no where give;
en exprefs Witnefs ( or Teftimony^ hereto
And the impofiibility of that being provx
a found Confequence i from God's Word,;
which makes God the Author of Self-Con -
tradiclion.

The Word of God no where commands
Dipping in. Baptifm, neither doth it fay
( in exprefs terms ) that either John or any
of the A potties did Baptize by Dipping
under the Water. Reader, keep the Ad-
verfary clofe to this, where doth the Word
hip appear, either in the Command oJ
Chrift ( when fpeaking of Baptizing ) 01
in any Inftahce of Perfons Baptized by }ohn
or the Apoliles ? If thou keep clofe to this.

c Enemy will retreat and fly to Confe

quence .

m )

quence:, the whicbj if he doth, (as no doubt
; he will) do thou pin foe him with a Holy
Courage, bs not afraid of his daring Brags.
How do you prove that to be a found and
Scriptural Confequence, which makes the
Holy Spirit of God the Author of Self—
[Contradiction ?

That thus it isv( will evidently ) appear,
'the A'dvcrfary can no way avoid it.. If
itfaou urge, ( -with an Holy Zeal for Truth )
what is '( Graphically , fer down- in God's
;Own Word, concerning the manner of Ap-
plication of the Blood of the Sacrifices, and ;
(the Waters of Purifications, both which
jhkd a Typical Relation to the Spiritual
iBaptifm/adrniniilred by the Spirit of ChriH.'
|Thefe were applied under the Ceremonial
Adminiftraticn, by Sprinkling, not by Dip-
ping, ( as has been before obferved. ) The.
iprophets, who foretold of Chriil, and the
great Benefits which Ihonld come by him to
^Believers under the Gofpel. They fet it.
forth by Sprinkling, witnefs Ifa.. 52. 15.
ind Eiek. 36. 25. And in the Gofpel we .:
ire allured, that the Spirit of Chrift doth ap~ .
)ly the Inward Spiritual Baptifrrr, by Sprink-
ing or Pouring out the Graces of his Spirit ;
jjx the Soul in the Work of Regeneration
i.ee Tit. 3. 6*.

Now to affirm, that Chrilr; either com- -
j$aj*ds Dipping, or that he .■.(Simfelf) was.'
; Dipped

C *f:4 )

Dipped in Baptifm, what is itbirt to affirm.,
that Chrift's Spirit doth contradict him-
felff What is pretended (for Dipping)
from John 3* 23, hath, nothing in it to
help their Caufe,, but what empty Conceit
and unferipturai Confidence fupply. John
( faith the AdverfaryJ was Qaftizang m
i&non, becanfe there was much Water there :
Therefore he Baptized by Dipping the whole
Body under the Water.

The Strefs (or Weight) of the Argu-
ment is laid on a fond Conceit, that much
Water (there; fignifies and imports the
Great&efs and Depth of Water., which
( plainly ) appears to be otherwife, witnefs
the Greek^ KW.iim^ many. Waters, de-
moting ratheMhe many Rivulets or Springs
©f Water, wherewith that place abounded^
than tjiat the Waters of that place were
deep. And it was ( I doubt not ) for Con-
leniency fake, that )ohn left Zethabarnh,
( a place of deeper Water ) becaufe ^£non
mas ( every way ) more convenient and
commodious for the Multitudes of People^
which came daily to his Baptifm.

Fifcators .Note upon the place,. may not
( here ) be either improper or impertinent
tea-. the Pur-ppfe if) hand., Vjdentwr fignificarl
fares Rivij non autem iinum magnum Flttmen.
Mw$ Rivulets-, not one. great Flood or Water >
(e.ems\hcre.) to fefirafted^hith thatLearnr

ed

C m )

ed Author y with whom agrees the befir
Geographers who give the Defcription of
that place.

I conclude my Treatife ( againft Dipping
in Baptifm) with that Saying of Godly and
judicious Sydenham: If ( faith he ) there Ire
any ab joint e need of Dipping, it. is to cool the
Heat of rhofe Mens Spirits, who deny Baptifm
to be. true ( or right ) Baptifm, becaufe not Ad-
minijxred by Blunging or Dipping.

Pveader : Obferye, that as In the Sacra^
irient of the Lord's-Supper, it is not fo
much the Quantity of the Wine drunk in
that Ordinance, (by a Believer J as the
Quality,; which fignifies and reprefents the
Blood of Chrift.

Chrill doth not tye a Believer up to fuch
or- fuch a Quantity of Wine to be drunk in
Remembranceof his Blood fhed, but (only)
commands Wine1 to be drunk,, leaving to
the Difcretion of. the Believer, what Quan-
tity to drink.

So in Water- Baptifm it is not the Depth
or Quantity of Water which is neceffary to
right Baptifm, but real Water •. it matters
-not how- fmall the Quantity be, fo there be,
but a Sprinkling (or Pouring vat) of Water
on the Subjed, to.reprefent the Sprinkling
( or Pouring out ) of the Graces of God's
Spirit on the EledSaul in Effectual. Calling.

The.

ro )

The Traoukd Antlquhy of Dip-
ping ( hi Baptipn ) ovcrthroivny
hy the moft Ancient Antiquity.

s

nee I appeared in Print, in vindicating
the Right of Believers Infant-Seed to-
/Baptifm, the (Seal of God's Covenant)
I- met with a Nsmelefs Author, who, by
his Book, fcems willing to be accounted,
not only an incomparable Antiquary, but
a matchlefs Linguiir.

This Author, by'the flonrifhes he makes,
hopes to drive all before him ^ fa as the An-
tagonists he fights againlr. fhall, i^j vain, ex-
pect any Relief from either the Original
Tongues or Antiquity, in Favour of Infant
Baptifm, or Sprinkling in that Ordinance.

He perceiving what a Lofs the Men of
that Perfwafion are at, in making good
r their Do&rine of Immeruon, in baptizing,
enters the Stage, brandifhing the Sword of
his affected florid Style ^ backt with a
( Riiffcl like ) Confidence, that neither Ma-
iler Malleus, his Anonimous Author, nor
any of the London Mifliftcrs, are able to

ftud

fiajnd before him in oppodng what he offers
( from Antiquity ) to prove, viz.. Immerfion
(or Dipping ) to be the only right way of
baptizing.

This Namelefs Author, when compu-
ting the Numbers of Divines ( both An-
cient and Modern) which* he brags, were
for Immerfion, and againfl Sprinkling : Ail
which, he affirms, nnderilood the Word
Bami^o/m his Senfe > He forgot that Max-
im'( known to every School-Boy who hath.
learned his Grammar ) Hnmamim eft err are.
It is the Property of Humane Nature to err,
and go aftray.

A Maxim never yet deny'd by any of
thofe Divines (either Ancient or Modern)
of whom, he fo greatly boafls, that I know
of.

Agreeing with this Maxim, is thatofFanl.
Tea let God he true, but every Man a Lyar^
Rom. 3.4.

From this it appears . ~( uncontroulably )
fure, and ( infallibly ) certain ^ that (fince
jtidamh Fall ) no ( raeer ) Man can pretend
to Infallibility.

This belongs to him ( alone ) who moft
juftly ftyles himfelf, the Ancient of Days,
Dan. 7. 9. The unerring Spirit of this an-
cient of Days, ( whofe revealed Will is the'
tme Antiqnity ) ajfnra w^ ( by Elihu ) that

( n8 )

great Men are not always wifer neither do tin
aged under -ft an d judgment, Job 32. 9.
~ On this very Account, viz,, the Fallibi-
lity of the wifeft and beft of Men, All Be-
lievers are by Chrift ( the Wifdom of God)
dehorted from calling any Man their Father
or their Mafter, Mat. 13. 9. On the fame
Account likewife is it, that Pad (hun'd to
Preach Ghrift in the florid Style and enticing
Words of Man's Wifdom (a Vanity too
much affecled by our Namelefs Author, and
too many Preachers of this Age, who ftudy.
more to advance their own-Fame and Party
than they do to Preach Chrift into the
Hearts of Sinners) that the Faith of true
Believers might not Hand in the Wifdom
of Men,. -but in the Power of God. 1 Cur.

I am not. more confident of any thing
( m^erly humane; than lam of this, viz..
that were th'ofe very Ancient and Modern
Divines (our Namelefs Author fo greatly
brags of) now living, they would not only
acknowledge that God's revealed Will was
before their Learning and Wifdom } but
they would (alfo ) acknowledge themfelves

rmiftaken and overfeen, about the Senfe of
the Words now in Dirpute.

If the facred Scripture then be the true
and infallible Antiquity, whereon we are to
ground our Faith, in all Matters Divine.

.It

(n9)

It (mod confpicuoully ) appears, how frau-
dulently our Namelefs Author lays about
him with the meretricious Paint of his or-
nate and polite Style • and his tingle Parts
and Learning r wherein ( poUibly ) both
himfelf and his Party may conceit him a
None-fuch, to ammfe and divert his credu^-
Ious and unwary Readers, from the plain
■ Word of God, which he cannot but fee (if
not wilfully blind ) is full againft him, in.
theprefent Gontroverfie ) that in Pretence
of Antiquity, and the Judgment of Modern
Divines •, being all of his Opinion, in the
Point of Immerfion. He may ( craftily )
draw Men into a felf-plealing Negleft, of
looking into,, or not minding the apparent
difference between the Primitive b*Vt*5 and
Bct^r^ Bafto and Baptizo^ its Derivative •, a
I thing fo plain, that any Man, but ordinarily
I skilled in the Greek, may readily perceive^
:that this Difcovery, hath given the Do-
j&rine of Immerfion ( or - Dipping ) fuch a
j Wound, as nothing can help, or cure, but a.
new Gofpel from Heaven, which Is (diredl:-
ly) ■ oppolite to that Gofpel which the Son of
God deliver'd from his Father, the which,
when our Namelefs- Author procures, I fhail*
then, never before, be of his Perfwaflon
(therein) albeit he fpake with'the;Tongue
of Men, and Angels/ Yea TertuUlan him-
ftlf, of whom our Namelefs Author feems

to

C "O )

to be very fond in this Point of Immerfion,
Will tell him, that Antiquity fine Feritate,
nihil aliud e/?, nifi veluftas Err or is. That
Antiquity without Truth, is but the very
mould of Error.

And in another place, treating of the
Holy Scriptures, he hath this Saying, Surge
Veritas, & fcrutare Scriptures tuas. Arife
Truth, and fearch thy own Scriptures Inti-
mating (thereby ) that whatever ( in Re-
ligion) that is not grounded on God's
Word is corrupt, and, as fuch, to be re-
jected, how ancient foever the fame may
be.

According hereto, the fame TertulUa??,
when he had to do with the Heretkh of
bis time: who (to maintain their Here fie s
in Oppofition to the true Religion ) plead-
ed Antiquity, crying out, Jgupd Antiquum,
id verum. That which is sfneient, is true.
Whereto he ( feafonably ) reply'd. Quod
Antiquis fimum, id vcrijnmum. That which
is moft Ancient, is most true.

Thefe Sayings of TertvMUn, I prefnme
our Namelefs Author either over-lookt
(when fearching Antiquity; or, at lea ft,
thought it not for his Purpoie.'t© take! no-
tice of them*, they being not fcr his turn.
That Bcctto ( the Primitive ) is always ns'd,
in the New-Tcframent, to exprefs Dipping
by: but never 'B«rV*?o its Derivative. And

; - that

C lii )

chat, B&£wiJ«? its derivative, is always iis'd
;ro exprefs Wafhing ^ by Pouring out Water
on'the Subject, but never B*Vtw, hath been
made good by Mailer Malleus his Anoni-
rnous, and remains frill unconfuted, and is
like fo to be, untill ( as hath been already
Lii a ted ) a New Gofpel be procured from
;Heaven, . #r.

And why our Namelefs Author fhould
think it ftrange, as well as unlikely, that
'fuch Wife and Learned Men, as the Anci-
:nt and Modern Divines, on whom the
(frrefs of his Argument depends, fhould be
;iH raiilakerr about the Senfe and Significa-
tion of the Words, now in Difpute, I can-
not tell, unlefs for want of ( duly ) confi-
liering, that thefe Ancients had ( incaute-
ouily ) imbib'd ( or drunk in ) forne of that
pmoak of Error which poyfoned and cor-
rupted thofe Primitive and Pnrefl Churches
planted by the Ministry of the Apoflles.

And that the Modern Divines, who-fuc-
jreeded them, had f from an over-weaning
ponceit of thofe Ancients ) been more ac-
quainted with the Truth of the Gofpel, then
|:hem (elves : hecaufe of their bordering "fa
dear on the time of the Apoflles, they^
tfere the apter to acquiefs in the Senfe of"
:hofe Words : as the fame was handed down
;o ^hemby. thofe- Ancients, without looking
my 'further,

- - As

0 rzt )

As many ( yet living ) have ingenuoufi
acknowledged, that they themfelves hav
done : having taken thefe very Word-
rather upon truft, thantryal: according t<
the unerring Standard of God's Holy Word

Gods with-holding many Secrets ( re&
ting to the Myileries of the Gofpel ) m tk<
vifible Churches here on Earth, from ih(
moll fagacions and quick-lighted Saints, i\
not at all to be wondered at. Becaufe in a!
his (Providential \ Difpenfations, toward:
his Children ( while in a Hate of Imperfe-
ction ) he ads in a way of uncontroulabh
Sovereignty.

To fome of his Servants he gives an Ex-
cellency in one Gift, and to others he give-
to excel in another Gift. To one, he be
Hows one Meafure, both of Gifts and Grace
and to another, he bellows a quite contra
ry Meafure.

In all which Diver flty of Difpenfation,
he is moll free and unlimited. Neithe
nlay any of the Sons- of Men fay ( or en
quire) Why doth he fo ? ]ob. 33. i?j
F.fkv.ii/£phef. 4.-7.

The great Diver iity of Gifts wherein tfic
Servants of Chrifl excelled one the other
(m every Age of the Church) is a con
vincing Argument, to -evince what I. hav
now aliened*

• Nay,

C "1 )

Nay, the very Perfonal Experience of
every true Believer, will confirm the fame.'

Nemo Mortaliumomnibm Horis fapit. No
Mortal is wife at all hours. I may add, nor
in all Matters.

That Proverbial Saying (Hill in ufe a-
[along the Learned ) B&nardm non videt om«
yia. Bernard jaw not all things, may ( with-
out any Reflection} be properly enough ap-
plied to the molt Learned and Wife, of
'ill thofe Ancient - and Modern Divines
made ufe of, irrthe Bulinefs of Immerflon.

I queltion not but God ( the^great So-
vereign of the World) hath referved many
things to be made known to the Churches
in the latter Days,which have been hid from
j:he Ancient and Modern Divines now
ooafted of.

j And in cafe the Dkcovery made of the
Difference between B*v-r» and &£&$%£
| which doth {o manifestly nonplus and
'tagger the greateft Champions for Immer-
ijon) bc_one of thofe many things, what
lath any to object again'ft God for his letting
b many of his -eminent and dearly beloved
laints go out of the World ignorant of
mat he -is now pieafed- to ■ difcover, 'anoV
■pake; known ? And what though iuch a
pifcovery be made by themeanelt aid moil
lefpifed of thofe called to labour in his
:to5s Vineyard ;. that his Sovereign Grace
> ' might

might honour thofeof his defpifed Ambaf
iadors, who ( on the account of the final
Figure they make in this World) are (light-
ed and neglected by the Rich and moil
Fam'd, among their Brethren, in facred
Office j is not the Difcovery worth Accep
tance ?

I do not doubt, but were fuch a Difco-
very made, by one of the Minifters in high
Efteem, among the Men of this Age, theii
Fame would be celebrated throughout both
City and Country.

But woe, and alas! the poor Man is
forgotten by his Neighbours, and his Words
are not heard. And Chat becaufe he is poor
Ecclef. 9. 15, 16.

Mailer Immerfer ( -fo I ftyie him from
the Title given to his Book ) he conceals
his Name, for what Reafon, I no more
know, than I know the Reafon why Matter
Mallei concealed my Name ( ftyling me
( in his Book ) Anonimous ) notwithstand-
ing my Name is to be feen in the Title-
Page of my Book: out of which Matter
Immerfer fufpecYs he ftole that Obfervation
about the Difference between the 2 Words
B*V™ andB**-T^? (which with the Argument
grounded thereupon ) hath left the Patrons
and greateft Champions for Immerfion, in a
Labyrinth, not knowing how (polfibly; to
work themfelvcs and their bleeding Caufe
out of the fame. When

C *M )

'When Mailer Immerfer fhouki,' like a
^candid and fair Antagonist, whofeekstlie
Honour "of God, and the Information of
Ignorant^ Souls < not his own Fame) have
come Point blank to fhew the particular
Chapter and Verfe (in the New Tefcament)
Iwhere the Word Immerfe ( or Plunge 5 is
jexprefr. by the Derivative b*™'£« or tne
Word (or Term W-afn in baptizing, is
jexpreft by the Primitive b*Vt». He falls
\on a vain glorious Difpiay, of his Rheto-
rical Eloquence, which he endeavours to
ifupportby the Auxiliaries fetcht out of the
; Armory of miftaken Antiquity, concluding
itbat now he hath hit it.

In this he feemsas confident of Vidory
:|as his Brother :j\tfenge is of his Mathemati-
-cal Demonftrationr By which he would
jfain prove, that the Partial Plunging, pra-
;ctifed by thofe of his Perfwaiion, "is the true
<and proper Mode to be us'd in baptizing. But
;boch thefe (and all others who are their Ab-
Ibettors } are defrred to fall like well mean-
ing Men:- upon plain Scriptural Demonflxa-
tions •, to make good their Caufe. One
jjplaim Scripture, which is Pertinent to the
l-Purpoie, will prove more convincing and
demonilrative, than all the Mathematical
3Demonflrations which Mailer Menge, and
'all the Mathematicians on Earth can devife.
I And then all the Arguments, which the

moft

( 1*6 )

~moft ingenious and elaborate Antiquary
can fetch from the Writings of all the An-
cient and Modern Divines ^ who lived on
the Earth fmce the Holy A potties went to
Heaven.

Belides the Argument grounded on the
proper Signification of the Words BxV™
and b***'?*, there are other Arguments laid
down to overthrow Immerfion in bapti-
zing, which Men, now living, who under-,
ftand the Tongues,and who have Reafon tc
know Antiquity, as well ( if not better j
as the (harpeil of that Periwafion, do ac-
knowledge to be irrefutable, either by
Scripture '''rightly underftood ) or by
fancrified Reafon. Let tbofe Arguments
be candidly and fairly, not only anfwered,
but alfo folidly confuted. And 1 do faith-
fully promife to found a felf-abafing Re-
treat, acknowledging (both in Pulpit and
Print too ) my Error and Miftake, about
what I am now vindicating and defending
-againft Anabaptifm,

And if I may, without Offence to Matter
Immerfer, or any of the Champions for Im-
merflon, be allow'd a Liberty ^ I enquire,
whether they judge that the Judgment and
Opinion of the Ancient and Modern Di^
vines, whereon they lay fuch Strefs ' about
Immerfion") be Argumentative in Matter
cf Faith or not ?

Here

C 1*7 )
r -Here they are oblig'd either to Gran£j
k)v deny/

^ If they deny the -Judgment of the And-
enr, and Modern Divines ( fo much boaited
of) to be Argumentative in mutters of
Faith. Then I deiire to be inform'd, where-
fore they lay fuch Strefs on their Judg-
ment in the prefent controversy .
I If they grant the Judgment of thefe to be
'Argumentative -in the prefent difpute,
j^aldefireto knQ]W : why theAdverfary
ii am now contending with, doth not,
bn the fame Ground they- receive Immer-
Jlon, receive Infant Baptifm, feeing that
jihofe Ancient, and Modern Divines were for
Infant Baptifm. In cafe then,that the Patrons
imd Advocates for Immerflon, do reject;
•he Ancients, &c. in the cafe of Infant
ftaptifm, why lhouid they blame me if I
i*ejecl: them, in the cafe of Immerfion t
\ I believe no man of common fenfe j can
|>lead for Anabaptifts : m this plain cafe.
jiad this very point been feriouily ( and^
Seliberately ) weigh'd, and confidered by
he great contenders for Iramerfion : I am
!pt to believe, tSey would' Bot:have been
k forward in their boafting, that the Anci-
nts,and the Modern. Divines, being all on
heir fide.

! I mall not now infill on any arguments/
> prove Go'fp'el . Baptifm, to be by pour-

C trs )

ing ont Water on the fubjeft, that being al
ready done, 1 hope, to the full fatisfaclion o
aii,who have read my Book without prejudice

I only requcft of mailer Immerfer (oi
any of his Coadjutors in this their linking
Caufe ) that when ( if ever ) He appear oi;
the Stage again, to prove the practice o:
Immerfion : that he will prove that Pan
was Baptifed by Immerfion. Atts 9. 18
And likewife that the Jay lor was fo baptiz'd
sitts 16. 33. with many others, of whon
the word of God makes no mention (ex
prefly ) either of their going down intoi
or their coming up out of the Water.

His filling up whole Pages with plaufibL
Storys and Quotations, but of Ancient an*
Modern Divines, will never down with m>
or any other, who make the unerring wTorc
of God the Ground of their Faith, nnlef
He effectually, prove, thofe Divines to b
infallible in what they fay in their writing;
the winch when he doth, I hope the argu
meat grounded on their infallibility ( if li
proves them fo to be ) will be altogether a
pertinent, to convince Anabaptills/of th
lawfulnefs of Infant Baptifm, as it will b
to convince me, and others, of the lawful
neifs of Immerfion in Baptifing.

Befides the queftion already put, 1 fha
prefume to propofe, the Fifteen Querk
Kere following to be Refolved, the whic
if the Men 1 now difpute againlt,can anfwe

fair!

( i*9 )

rairly and folidly from God's Word, I
will lie down, at their Foot, and immedi-
ately become their Profelyte. If they either
cannot or will not, I hope they have no
Reafon to think, or fay, that I ad againft
the light of my Gonfcience, if I continue to
^maintain the Divine Right of Infant-Bip-
;tifm, and that the Mode of Baptizing, which
the Gofpel in joins Believers to pra&ife, is
by Sprinkling (or Pouring oat) "the Water
on the Subject.

^uerry i. How prove they, that the In-
Ifant Seed of encovenanted Parents ( who
[were, by God's Acl: of fovereign Grace,
taken into the very fame Covenant with
their Stipulating Parents) were ever caffc
lout of that Covenant ?

That they were taken into their profeP
ling Parents Covenant, 1 have" effectually
proved.

If they, who oppofe Infant-Baptifm, .be
unable to mew to which of the Prophets
( under the Old Teftament ) or to which of
the ApofHes/ under the New) God gave
-a Command to call Infants out ^f their Co-
venant Relation to the Church of which
.their Parent ( or Parents ) is a profeffing
Member. If they cannot demonftrate, what
the Sin ( or Provocation ) of Infants is,
whereby they have merited their .being cut
off from the Covenant •, then muft. it ( ne-
G % ccflarily)

■J ( tjo )

peflkrily ^ follow ( all the Wit and Learn-
ing of Men and Angels can-not help the Ad-
verfary here ) that the Infants- of. believing
Parents are Hill in Covenant, and ^as fuch;
have a Covenant Right to Water Baptiftn.

Quer. 2. How can Anabaptifts prove that
Abraham's Blefling is come on the Gentile-
Seed of Abraham under the Gofpel ( thro"
Chrift ) feeing the Infants of Believing Gen-
tiles are by them denied , to belong to the
Covenant? the term, Seed of Abraham, ex-
tends to the Infants of Gentile Believers un-
der the Gofpel, as truly as it did to the
Children begotten of Abraham's Body.
This is beyond all Contradiction, as appears
from Gal. 3. 29. compared with Gal. 3. 14.

Quer. 3. How prove they, that any In-
fants f dying in Infant State ) are faved,
feeing, that ( according to Anabaptifm j In-
fants neither belong to the Covenant, nei-
ther are they capable of Regeneration ?

Quer. 4. How can they juftifie their ex-
tending the Grace of God, beyond the
Bounds of God's ownCovenant }in that they
hold and affirm, that all Infants, without
Diftindion, are faved who die in Infancy ?

One while they deny, that any Infants,
while Infants,belong to God's Covenant, or
are capable of Regeneration. Another
while they hold and teach, that all Infants
pre faved, who die in Infant State. Now

whether

C »« )

whether thus to hold and teach, do not
'evidently prove them guilty of Self Con-
tradiction, and in both their Opinions,
'concerning Infants, whether they be not
.contrary to God's Word : 'tis left to all
;Men' who can but read Emfifaj to judge,
J Jitter, f. How can they juftifie their Pra-
ctice, in "diitinguifhing themfelvesfrorn thc-ir
godly Neighbours, by ftyling themfeivcs
JsSaptifts and Baptized Churches of jefus
'thrift < by which Practice, it is evident,
■they unchurch all the other Churches c#v
'jChrift ( on Earth J which are not of their
iPerfwafion.

If I miftake not, Dr. ''Rnjfl, that ralh and
'confident Aifertor of Immerilon, and Op-
iptignor of Infant-Baptifm ;.he 'owns, in \m
Book, that the Title of Baptifb- was iirlt
.given to John ( via Emimntia ) by way of :
jEminency. Denoting the high Office, af-
;fign'd him by God, as he was to be the Fore-
runner of Chart his Son, to prepare the
:jway before him.

Where do they read, that any (in all

the New Teftament ) were ft y led Baptlils,

even among the many who were Baptized

by John and the Apoftles of Chrift ? If then |

•they can give no Inftance, from God's

jiWord, of. any that were ftykd Baptifts,

jamong the many that were Baptized, And

that it be unqiieftionably true ^ that Bap-

Gj tilt

( if* )

tift denotes the Office to which John was
called by God. Doth it not convincingly
appear, bow vainly they afTume to them-
selves the Title of Baptifts > and that with-
out any Precept or Example j to warrant'
their Practice herein.

Baptift C if t miftake not the Term ) de-
notes and intends Baptifer. Are all who
glory in being fryled Baptifts, Baptifers ?
Confcience awaken, and fpeak to this Point;

«J§W. 6. How juftifie they their Bapti-
sing Women, feeing that Women are not
intended in the Words of the grand Com-
nnfiioii ( as Dr. Ruffd ailerts) they bein£
not of the Mafculine Gender -7for ( accord-;
\*\% to him ) none are the proper Subjects
of Baptifm, but fuch as are of the Mafcu-
line Gender5 or Male-kind.

By Dr. Ettffils Argument, it is plain.,
that as he excludes Infants from Baptifm,
becaufe of their Infant State-^.fo he exclude*
Women, from having a Right to that Or-
dinance, becanfe they are not of the Male-
kind. By which it plainly appears, that
the Charity of Dr. Rnjftl ( and ail who arc
one with him herein ) for poor Infants and
their Mothers, is of equal Extent.

Cito'. 7. How prove they that fuch as
renounce their Infant Baptifm, and fubmit
to their Pra&ice of Dipping are ( herein ;■
aded, by aa infallible Spirit ?

Qttcr. 8

Que?. 8. How prove they that God's

iCovenant of Graft (under the Gofpel)

hath any initiating Seal, which fucceeds

vCircumciiion, in cafe they grant not that

Water Baptifra did?

Here they rauft either grant ordeny. If'
they grant that Water-Baptlfm did fucceed
in the room of Circumcifion, then are they
obliged to (hew a convincing Reaion, why
they deny Baptifm to the Infant-Seed of
encovenanted Parents, feeing they were
I never yet call out of Covenant.
j If they deny that Water-Baptifm did
I fucceed in the room, of Circumcifion, then
J are they oblig'd to lay down convincing
1 Reafons, wherefore they make Water- Bap-
rtifm the Door of Entrance into their
Churches.

•Quer. 9. Whether their bearing People in
hand, that Obedience to Chriftin Mat. id.
18. and imitating his Example (laid down
in Mat. 3. 16. ) is the Ground of their
Dipping in Baptifm, be not ameer empty
Pretenllon ? feeing how unconcerned they
are, either to obey the Command of Chrirf,
or to follow his Example, in the cafe of
poor Infants, who are not able to fpeak3 w:
act for themfelves.

Moll certain it is (it cannot be denied )

thatChrift commanded Infants to be brought

. to him, Mat. \p* 14. . And as certain it is,

0fc&4 . . that

\ *M )

iVht emr^raced them in his Arms, and

bterTed them, Mar. io.' \6. Why donor

Aiiabaptjjb make Confcience of obeying

rift-s Command, and following his Ex-

p'.e snd Practice herein ?

■r s no need of flying to firained Me-
phors and Confequences, where Matter
of Fstt fo plainly appears. Let the Ad-
': get over this if he can,
Jfyer. io. How can they prove, by God's
Word, their Frafticein laying iiich a ftrefs
on Water-Baptifm ( efpecially en the Mode
Baptizing J as tends to uphold and pro-
.au: t! at Rotnijk Principle, which teaches
at Water Baptiirn is (abfolutelyj ne-
ceOary to Salvation? A Principle, no way
agreeing with the Word of God, or the
Judgment and Confefilons of any of the
Proteftant Churches, either at home or a-
brcad. And not only fo, but which tends
to difturb the Peace of all the Churches,
and to fet the Members of Chriilian Socie-
ties at varience among themfelves. This
Practice cannot be jnftihed by the Gofpel,
which exhorts all the Followers of the Lamb
to Peace and Order, Epbef. 4: 3. Plain it
(gfctas to me, that thofe Perions who prefs with
fo great Violence and intemperate Zeal,
the Neceiftty of Baptizing by Dipping, are
as real and as great Difturbers of the
Churhces Peace> as they were, who, in the

Apoftles

C '--130

Apoftlcs times, prelTed the Necefllty cl
Circumcifion, AlU 1 5. 24. (?*/. 6. 12, 1 3.

As the former did Idolize the Ordinance
of Circumcifion, 1 leave it to every indif-
ferent and impartial Reader to determine,
I whether thefe do not Idolize Water-Bap-
(tifm, adminiftred by Dipping? To whom
'! I fay ( as Paul to the Profeflbrs of his time,
! concerning Circumcifion ) For in pfys Chriff
neither Circumcifion avaikth tiny thing, nor
] Vncircumcifion, but Faith which norketh by
Love, Gal 5. 6. -That Water - Baptifrn
j (whether by Sprinkling or Dipping J a-
I vaileth as much to Salvation ^ (where the
i Heart remains unchanged ) asCircumcikon
1 did avail thofe who trufted to 'Aiofes his
j Law for Juflifkation and Life.

Quer. H-. How will they prove that
Chrift, who came in the Flefh to break down
] that Partition -Wall, which Separated be-
; tween Jews and Gentiles.:- to the "end",, both
j may become one Body, did erect i or fet
; up) a Wall of -Separation between believ-
ing Parents, and their dear and tender
Babes, who ( next to themfeives ' are the
greateft Comfort a Believer deiires and
prays for i n this Wot Id ?

I believe no Man, who is taught of God,

dares to think or fay, that I am miiiaken,

when 1 affirm,that thus to hold, .or -ftach, is t

high andrfawcy Reflection on the God ol

G i :, L(M

Love, who hatfr planted ' in Parents that
Principle of natural Affedtion to their dear
Off-fpring.

That God hath implanted the Principle
of natural Affection in Parents, to their In-
fants ^ and that He commands Parents to
love and delight in them, as they are his
j>rornifed BlefTmg, none- can deny. Now,
for Men to hold (, or teach) that God hath
cut oft' ( or call out) the Believers Seed,
froitfr {hating in the Mercy and Blefiing of
their believing Parents Covenant \ what is
it but, interpretatively, to fay, and teach,
that God hath rafed the Foundation of that
Natural Affection, planted in Nature, by
tfts own Spirit.

For, 1 would gladly be informed, what
Delight. a true Believer can take in thofe
Children, whom God hath caft off, or re-
lied ?

Qhct. t & How can Anabaptifb' deny,
withor.t Refilling God's Truth, that the
[/lasting in of theGentiles into Chrifr,muft
bear an exs& proportion, with God's call-
ing off the Jews for their Unbelief? When
Gxi call out (or cut off > the Unbelieving
jews, their Children- were caft out with
their Unbelieving Parents. When God
ingrafted ( or planted ) the Gentiles into
their room, He took in their Infant Seed
along with thsiv believing^Parents. Rom.

fl'i; 19/20. As-was the Calling out otr
j Jews, fuch, of neceffiry, 'until' be the Ingraft-
ing (or planting} in ®f%he0ehtites.
Jhter. 13. How am our Englifi Anabap-
• tills reconcile their practice of Dipping in j
' Baptifm, with thepraeYiceof their Brethren
j in Holland? who baptize by fpr inkling 'or
j pouring out) the Water on the Subject ;
1 As all Orthodox Proteflants are known to
] do.

\ Strange it is to me, that Or Rujfzll, and
I thofe of his Ferfwafion, who make fuch *
I brags that the Dutch Tranilators had traflf-
I lated the words John the Baptift^ Johannes
| de Dooper, John the Differ : And the words
' Baptizing them, - Salve dopende, Dipping
j them, that they mould be ignorant how
; their Brethren in Holland do adminifler
j Baptifm. And as flrange it is, that if the
' Anabaptifts in Holland had look'd on the
! Dutch Tranflators to be nearer the Senfe of {
! the Holy Ghoft, then were other Tranna-
; tors of the Bible, that they mould not flick
to the i>^c/;Tran(!ators, in pracliilng the
Mode of Dipping, in B-iptillng, rather than
as they now pra&ifr.

The apparent difference then 'between
the Englifli and Dutch Anabaptifis, about
the mode ( or manner ) ofBaptifing, is to
me -an Argument* that thdfe -"in Holland are
far -more oouftdera&e and wary,, in ftmnnir^

and

and avoiding the ill confequences which
follow preffing; and praftifing the mode of
Dipping, rather than Sprinkling or pour-
ing out the Water 5 than are our Eth&jh-
Anabaptifts. They in Holland, I anTapt
to believe, know (and coniider) that the
jennD/r?, is never intended intheGofn \
but in a bad (or evil) fenfe. Whereas
the term S?rMk ( or wafh ) with Water,
is always taken in a good fenfe; the which
the EngUjh Anabaptifts either cannot, or
I .eliearcrefolv'd they will not mind ortake
notice of • icafl their fo doing fliould throw
down their Dagon to the Ground To Rich
1 on-ty SWi <%' volmit dccipi, derifiantur.
They who are willing and defirous to be
deceived, kt them be deceived

$uen 14. How can Anabaptifts who
Hold and teach, that Chrift hath no true
Churijieson Earth, bntthofe of their own
Perfwaliion, juftifie their Pra&ice, in fitting
down in Feilowihip with thofe whom they
own not. for true Churches ?

Let fuch anfwer the following Dilemma
ff they can.

The Congregations of their godly Neigh -
bourse to which (but too) many of them
joyn themfelves, either they are true
Churches of Chrift, or they are not fo j one
of theft two tfaey ruuft Hand to. If they
v them to be true Churches of Chrifi:,

why

C 139 )

why do fo many of them join with them
in Church Communion.

If they be true Churches of Chrift, how
dare they to difturb and difquiet the Peace
of fuch Churches, in preffing. the Neceffity
of renouncing the Baptifm received in In-
fancy, and by fprinkling^ labouring all they
can to draw Church-Members to be re-bap-
tized, and that by Immeruon.

Let Men pretend what they can, for
fuch a notch potch Communion in Churches-.
I ftedfaftly believe the Event and Iflue of
fuch Practices, will, fooner or later, con-
vince all Gain-fay ers, that it neither plea-
feth Chrirt, nor is it any way promotive of
true Peace or Gofpel Holinefs in the
Churches of God's People. L heartily with
this may beleriouily and feafonably weight,
and, without Prejudice, considered by thole
Pallors, &c. whofe Duty it is to watch over
.the. Flocks committed_ to their Charge, by
the great Shepherd of the Sheep. And that
by keeping the Churches Doors fhut againft
fuch - Perfons being admitted into Church -
Fellowibip, whofe very Principles have a na-
tural Tendency, not only to fubvert the
Church's Peace, but, which is far worfe^
to deftroy the very being of the Churches
themfelves.

Were the Churches of Chriil in England
but throughly a waken'd^out of that Security

which

C 140 )

which hath ( a long time ) feiz'd them, they
would foon become fenfible of what is now
complained of and witnefled againft, and
would be forced to acknowledge me to be a
faithful Friend and a hearty Well-wifher to
all the Churches of the Saints. But under their
prefent Frames, I expecl; fmall Thanks foV
the prefent Faithfulnefs and Plainnefs here
( and elfewhere ) manifefted for God's
Glory, and the general Good of his Peo-
ple.

^ Plain it is to me, that the mixt Commu-
nion in Churches, of which many ( who
confidernot the thing aright as they fhonld)
are too fond, is the very Source from
which fprings that vifible Confumption in
rnoft of the Congregational Churches now
in England.

I fhall never be reconciled to that Cha-
rity which (in Pretence of Peace and Mode-
ration) opens the Churches Door to Church
deftroying Principles.

There is nothing more evident to feeing
and confiderate Minds, than that the ground
which the Congregational Churches have
loft of late Years, the Anabaptiils have
gained it. And the Congregational Churches -
rhay thank their niixt Communions fori:.

The Anabaptiils feem \ to outward Ap-
pearance at ieafb; to hug and embrace the
Congregational Churches, as fome do the

C M* )

Queen* But how near both come to the
1 Iv/s embracing the Body of the Oak, I leave
unprejudiced Men to determine.

I hope I fhall die in the fame Judgment
of a great Divine, who faid, that in Ecclefia
Evangelic a reBe Conftitnta , Anabapifmu*
minime eft toller andus. In a GofpelChurch right-
fy conftitnted Q fa id he) Jinab apufm is by no
means- tob e toller at ed>

How applicable to the -pr^nt Purpofe^
that Ceremonial Prohibition . recorded in
Dent. 22.9. is, I humbly leave to the fe-
rious Confideration of the London Minhters,

I would not be miftaken, as if I were out
of Charity with thofe of - the Anabaptift
Perfwafion, though it hath (providentially;
fallen to/ my Lot to attack their unfcriptu-
ral Tenents, on a publick Stage, A Pra-
ctice, to which I have been often provok'd
both in Ireland and England. Their Teach-
ers frequently inculcating into their Follow-
ers, that thofe who are for Sprinkling In-
fants, have nothing to offer in defence of
fuch a Pra&ice, either from Scripture or
from Antiquity. This taking with weak
and injudicious People every where, I have
been by Men and Women of that Per&va^
Hon, publickly let upon, to force a Difpute
about Baptifm. If what God hath enabled
me to difcover, concerning Baptifm, prove
uneafie and unanfwerableD they are to blame

thexnfelves3

thcmfelves, who ftirr'd me up to ftudy the
Point.

§>uer. 15. How can Anabaptifts clear
themfelves from being charged with being
a&ed by a Lying Spirit ? in that they tell
the World, that Infant-Baptifm was not
known in the World till Three Hundred
Years after Ch rift's Time.

Whereas, it is evident to any, who look
into Antiquity, that Infant-Baptifm was not
queftioned till about Three Hundred Years
after Chrift. As by the particulars here
following will plainly appear.

" I begin with the Account given by
"Matter Philfot ( a faithful Martyr of Jefus
" Chrift ) whofe Words ( concerning the
u Antiquity of Infant - Baptifm ) are. on
<c Record, in Vol. yi. of jitts and Movh-
u ments, page j 08 and page 509, He faith
cc ( pofitively) that Infant-Baptifm was not
u oppos'd or denied,, till about 3 Hundred
cc Years after Chrift. His Words are thefe,
iX Auxtntius, one of the An an Seel: was one
ic the. firft that denied Infant-Baptifm ( or
u the Baptizing of Children. ) And next
" after hhn7 Pelagic the Hcrctlck. Xndfome
cc others there were in St. BerJim&h Time,

as appears by his Writings. And in our
<c Times ( faith he ) the Anabaptifts , an
" inordinate kind of Men, ftirr'd up by the
" DeviL, to the Deftruftioa of the GofpsL

"And

C 141 )

1 " And afterwards r finally ( faith he )

i* 1 1 can declare out of Ancient Writers, that

'"-the Baptifra of Infants hath continued

i u from the Apofties time onto ours. Nei-

«f ther that it was inftituted by anyCouncils,

1 cC neither of the Pope, nor of other Men,

i iL but commended from the Scripture by

! " the Apofties themfelves.

! u Origin ( faith he "who lived Two Hun-

4t dred Years after Chrift, upon, the Decl'ar-

i u ration of the Epiftle to the Romans, ex-

" pounding the 6th Chap. wr. 8. that the

i " Church of Chrift received the Baptifm of

| " Infants from the very Apofties.

cc Hierom about Four Hundred Years at5-
i " ter Chrift, maketh mention of the Bap-
cc tifin of Infants in his Third Book againft
the Pdagians, and in his Epiftle to Lata-;..
u JugHjHne about Four Hundred Years
after Chrift, reciteth, for this Purpofe, a
a place out of John Biftiop oiConftantinofle^
" in his firft Book againft ?*//*», Chap. 2.
c< <t<*wt»' % ** *W#f* ti^'fypK For this caufe
cc we. baptize -Children, &c And he a-
<c gain, to Hierom, Epif. 28. 8. That Cy-
cc prim who lived about Two Hundred
4C and Fifty Years after Chrift, not making
l(- any new Decree, but firmly obferving the
cc Faith of the Church judged with his Fel-
" low Bifhops, that as foon as one was born,
'""he might' lawfully be Baptized. The

ct place

a

44

c m )

ct place of 'Cyprian is to be feen in hisEpi-
M Hie to Fidm.

" ^uguftine in writing againfl: the Do-
***t?Jtf lib 4. chap 23,-24. faith, that the

Baptifm of Infants, was not^derived from
"the Authority of Men, neither of Goun-
"cils, but from the Tradition or Do-
" ftrine of the Apoftles.

" Cyril ( who lived in Julians time ) upon
" Lev. chap. 8. approves the Baptifm of
H Children , and condemns the Iteration
? of Baptifm.

a Thefe Authorities of Men, faith he, I
"do alledge, not to tie the Baptifm of
'''Children to the Teftimonies of Men.
**" But to fhew how Mens Teftimonies do a-
^c gree with God's Word,and that the Vcri-
" ty ofAntiqnity is on our fide, and that the
" Anabaptifls have nothing but Lies for
" them- and new Imaginations, which feign
'c the Baptifm of Children to be the Popes
" Commandment. Thus far Mailer Phil*

"pet.

The great Polanns in his Syntag, Thcologi^
lib. 6. chap. ^5-. de Baptifmo^ lays down the
very Words ofOrigen in his Second Tomb
and Fourteenth Homily on Luke , thus,
" Parvuli Baptizantur in remifflonem Pecca-
■ tor urn , quorum Peccatorum^ vclquo tempore
" peccaverunt, aut quomodo putefi ulla Uvacri
* in parvulis ratio fubfifiere^ nifi juxta ilium

fenft

am

U

(14?)

fenfam de quo paulo ante dtximut. NhUUs
Mundta a forde, nee fi un'ms Dki cptidem
• ufaer it vita ejpts jitter Terr am. Et quia per
a Baptifmi Sacrament mn Nativitatis, jordes
^ dtpommtur propter ia baptiz.antnr& parirttli.
: u Little ones ( faith he ) are Baptized for the
I a Remijfwn of Sins. Of whofe Sin$$ or in what
' a time have they finned ? Or how can there
I a be any need or occafion ofWaftring in Little-
'j u ones, unlefs according to the Senfe I have al-
1 Cc ready- mentioned.

ct There is none free from- Pollution or
i " Filthinefs f underftand of natural Birth)
I " no, though he lived bntone Day on Earth,
" And becaufe that by the Sacrament of
ci Baptifm, the Pollution or Filch of natural
u Birth is done away, therefore it is that
<L even Little-ones are Baptized.

I will quote Jluguftine again, and the ra-
ther,.becaufe Dr. Ruffel and others of his,
Perfwaflon, have, with an jirminian Confi-
dence, told their Readers that ^uguftine^
with others of the Ancients, have oppos'd
Infant Baptifm. ^ttgxftin's Words are
thefe, " Confuetuda Matris Ecclcfia, Bapti-
u zandis p^rvnlis, neqnaquam fpernenda eH \
u nee ullo rnodo fuptrfiua deputanda,nec omnino
c credenda, nifi Idpuft-olica ejfet Traditio, lib.
cc 10. de. Gent, ad Lit. cap. 23,

w The Cuftora, faith he, of our Mother
" the Church, in Baptizing Little ones, is

no

C m6 )

1 no way to be flighted- or rejected, norc-
^ therwife to be eiteem'd or accounted of,

'then as an Apoitolieal Tradition.

c; " The fame ^uguftine faith in Lb. 4. De

^ Baptljmo Infant. Jzhwd univetfa tenet Eccle-

ufi*-> MC Conciliis lnftitutum, fed fencer re-

^ tentum eft. Non mfi slxthcritate j4poftolic*

;. tmditum veriffime creditur. That, faith he,

^wheats had by the univerfal Churchy and

- was mt inftitutcd by any Councils, but was

alvrays hc!d,we are 10 believe, that it came,

or was delivered, by no other then by JlpoRo-

" lical Authority. J f™

I might fill a Volume with Authors
Names, if need were, to demon (irate to the
World how falfe thefe Pretenders to An-
tiqmtyagainil Infant Baptifa are, as in 0-
ther thing?, wherein Infant-Baptifm is con-
cerned, fo alio in this of Antiquity, where-
by they frill labour what they csn to ilag^
ger fimple and credulous People.

I will bring up the Rear with that molt'
excellent and incomparable Calvin, whom
I think fit here to mention, as beino; a Man
of that Orthodoxy and Clearnefs° in the
Gofpel, that I account it rather an Honour
than a Reflection on the Ancient and Mo-
dern Divines (gone to Heaven to have
their Teflimonies (in Theological Debates,)
back'd and confirmed with the Judgment of
fo great a Man.

The

( H7 )

The judicious and penetrating Cahin^hh
Words on Mat. 1 9. 1 3, 14. are as here fol-
low, u Nequc enim hoc leviter es~t pretereun-
I dumyqwd Infantes fib i offhrri Chr) flits jubet^
f addita raticne, quoniam tali urn fit Regnum
-4 Coelorum. Ac poftea voluntatemfuam opere
u teftatur. Dum ipfos ample xm Tree at lone
,c benediEUoneq^fuo Patri commendat. Si ad-
u due i Chriflo Infantes tqitm eSi. Cur rwnC^
lc ad Raptifmum recipi Symbolum noflr<z cum
tc Chriflo Communioni*^ ac SocietatiP. Si eorum

eft RegnumCdorum^ cur fignum negabitur ?

This, faith he, is not lightly to be pafTed

I*4 by, that Chriifc commanded Infants to be

; " brought to him. Adding a Reafon, viz..

" i>ecaufe of fuch is the Kingdom of Hea-

w ven. And afterwards he declareth his

j*c Will by his Deed. When { having em-

I braced them ) he commends them to his

:tc Father,- by his Praying, for them, and

-"his blefling of them. If it it be meet

W that .Infants fhould be brought to Chrift,

'" why not alfo that they fhould be received

|ccto Baptifm, which is the Badge of our

f Communion, and irellowlhip with Chrilt ?

ct If theirs be the Kingdom of Heaven, why

i" fhould the Sign be denied them? Cah.

| lnft. lib. 4. cap. itf. Art. 7. »

L Again the fame Calvin hath-thefe Words,

f Quod am em apud Simplkem vulgum diffe-

ffminant longam Amor urn feriempoft Chriflo

Refurre-

C H8 )

At Refurvecbionem pr<zteriijfe^ quibm incognitm
u erat Ptbobaptifmui. In eo focdiffimb men-
cC tlmtitn Siqaidem nullus eft fcriptor tarn
cc vetnftus, qui non ejus Originem ad Apo-
C4 ftolorum fecnlum pro certo refer at.

"That which they (meaning the Ana-
baptifts) " fcatter among the fimple conr
" mon People, that a long trad of Years
" paffed after the Refurrection of Chrift ;
ct wherein Pedobaptifm was unknown. In
" that ( faith he ) they moft fhamefully lye -,
cc for there is no Writer fo ancient, who
u doth not refer its Original to the Age of
tc the Apoftles,as anundoubtedTruth. Calv.
Inft. lib. 4. cap. 1 6. Jrt. S.

Herein, 1 doubt not, and in hisSoundnefs
in the Doftrine of Judication by Faith
alone-, and his being fuch an invincible
Propugnator of the Doctrine of Election,
and Reprobation ( before time ) lay the
Crimes of the Renowned Calvin j for which
his truly honourable Name, and never fuf-
ficiently to be valued Writings, are fo hate-
ful to all the Romijh Synagogue, and-^rw/-
man Anabaptifts.
fl J*Hcr. 16. Whether it be honeft and fair
forThe Anabaptifts, to fly to confcquentia!
Arguments to juftific their giving the
LordVSupper to Women *, and their dip-
ping the whole Body in Baptifm ? And ac
the fame time to rejed consequential Argu-
ments

( *49 )
ments brought to juftifie Infant Baptifm-
:acd that (merely; becaufe they are but
consequential. Whether this Praftice of
theirs be not a manifeft violation of that
Golden Rule prefcribed by Chrift Himfelf,
Matt. j. 12. is left to every ingenious and
impartial Reader to judge.

'Jiner. 17. Whether it argues Ingenuity
and Chriftian Candour in Anabaptifts, to
catch hold of any opportunity to appear in
Print, againft any of the Pedobaptiils,
when they find they have an Advantage a-
gainft an Author • and- to pafs by ( in fi-
lencej any Author, whofe Argument they
know themfelvesnnabie to confute? Whe-
ther fuch a Practice doth not prove, that
there is more of the old Serpent's Craft
and Subtilty in-it, than there is of that
Wifdom which is from above, is left to any
unprejudic'd Reader to determine. I con-
fclude my A^cndix with this fair Propofal,
That if Mailer Immerfer, or any other of
that Perfwafion, can ( by God's Word )
confute the Arguments laid down in the
foregoing Treatife, to prove the Divine
Right of infant-Baptifm.
- And that the Mode of Baptifiug muft be *
by pouring Water on the Subject, not by
dipping. If he, or any of his Party, can
fioneitly and impartially refolve the Queries
pounded in this J^mdix^ I (hall forth-
with

C *>o ')
with lay down the Cudgels, and in Pulpit
and Print exprefs my Repentance and Sor«
row for appearing fo zealoufly concerned
to oppofe Antipedobaptifm.

If my Arguments remain (till unconfuted,
and the Queries here propounded be not
impartially fpoken to, and refolv'd •, I hope
thofe of the contrary Perfwafion will no more
pretend to tell the World, that the Pedo-
baptifts have nothing to plead ( either from
the Sacred Scriptures, or from Antiquity )
in favour of Infant Sprinkling.

If thefe Difcov-eries prove convincing^
and irrefutable, 1 heartily and fincere-ly
defire, that the whole Praife hereof may
be afcribed to the Only Wife God, whofe
Blefled Spirit led me into the faving Know-
ledge of Jbraham's Covenant, and blefled
me with a holy Refolntion to vindicate and
maintain the fame, in behalf of the Infant
Seed of Believers, againft all Oppofers
whatfoever. And let all who reap any
Benefit by thefe Difcoveries join with me
in fayine, Amen.

They who defire to be further fatisfied
of the Truth of what is molt juftly charged
on Anabaptift Writers, iw. their mifre-
prefenting Authors (by them quoted J for
the Support of their antifcriptural Caufe ;
let them, without prejudice, read the Inge-
nious Obed Wills on Infant Baptifm, who

hath

C m )

hath -not only anfwer'd and -confuted, but
alio fo particularly and effectually anato-
mized Henry Danvers, for not only a Mif-
reprefentcr, but an egregious Perverter of
the ancient Fathers and , Councils, &c.
whom he quotes in his Book againfl Infant:
Baptifm, &c. that it will eafily, be perceiv-
ed (Ay any Man ofSenfe; how'impofiible
it isfor the molt pregnant -and fagacious of
that Perfwafion ( now living J to help him
out of that Quagmire, into which his match-
tefs Inadvertency and unparallell'd- Dilin-
genuity hath plung'd him.
,- Be fides which worthy. Authour, (\i
farther Pro-vocation be given ) other plain
Iciflances (hall be given of the like Abufes,
which fome of the Anabaptift Writers (of
later date ) have put upon fome of the molt
Eminent of the Congregational Divines ) •
itfhofe Reverend Names and curtaifd Ex-
jieffions have been made ufe of, and ( egre-
;ioufly ) perverted, on purpofe to gain the
20 re Credit to their heterodox Opinions*
Lnd that after thofe godly Divines were
one to Glory. A Practice, which ( befides
ic great wrong fuch Men do their own
ouls) carries two monflrous Evils in its
Vromb.

Jirtt, It charges notorious Lies and

j^own Falihoods on the Dead, who cannot

|lw fpeak for themfelves-, which -is both

H inhumane

C If*- )

Inlnimane and bafe, and no way agreeing
with the known Uzximr Nihil nifi bonum de
Mortms^ nothing &ould be fpoken of the
Deceafed but good.

Secondly, It lays a Snare and a Net in the
way of the Living, to beguile and draw
them afide from the Paths of Duty ; ; Which
Pra&ice is nothing fhort of Leading the
Blind out of their way, which the Word oi
God exprefly forbids -. Cur fed bt be thai
mahth the Blind to wander out of the way
And all the People fitll fay Amen, Deut. 27
18. compared with Matt. 1$. 14. I for-
bear here to (hew how near this PraStd
treads on the very Heels of the Romifh Je
fuits Praftice. Now, whether the Anabap
tifts or 1 be to blame -, they for endeavour
ing to uphold their Caufe, by belying th
Dead*, or I, for endeavouring to cautioj
and undeceive the Living, is left to th<
impartial Reader, who is unwilling to b
/impofed on, to judge.

TH

( jifl )

THE

POSTSCRIPT.

1

I Had no fboner finilhed my Jlpfendix to
the foregoing Treatife ( in this Second
Impreffion ) but an Account was given
ane, that one Matter Stenmt had appear'd
In Print againft Infant-Baptifm, &&

His Book I did refolve to read, if God
pleas'd to permit me, to fee whether any
thing material hath been offer'd de novo
which hath not ( formerly > been brought
into Plea by his Predcccflbfs, in Defence of
that Caufe, which he feems refolv'd to de-
fend againfl all Gainfiyers of wbatPerfwa-
ilon foever.

But finding nothing in it that, is either

Novel, or any thing tending to enervate

and confute the Arguments laid down ia

Defence of Infant-Baptifm, dtk I faw no

lOccafion to make any further Enlargnient

Ion what I have now added to the foregoing

| Treatife ; unlefs to make fome Remarks oh

iome Paflagcs in Matter Sunnttt Book/

To the end Mailer Stenntf% Ingenuity may

[be acknowledged^ he^ and all of his Per-

H 2 fwafiofl,

( *5:4 )
fwafien, be made feniible, that he is net
more fixed (in his Refolution ) to Hand
by that Caufc which he hath efpbufed, than
I am to maintain and vindicate the contrary,
until Mailer Stennet^ or fome other of his
PerJTwation., fairly beats me out of the Field
by the Strength of Scriptural Arguments.

The firit Remark I make on Mailer Sten-
nefs Book, is, the ingenuity and Learning
which adorns his Book, for which"! can
caliiy give him that Encomium rdf Praifc
which a Man of his Character juftly defery.es,
from all who are Lovers of" Learning* And
this,- without (any way ) : weakening- the
Caufe- 1 am now engag'd to defend, Mailer
Sunmt is not the only Man of Ingenuity and
Learning -who hath patronized a wrong
Ulauieyand who hath prov'd greatly miflakcn
•in Polemical Controverfies in Theology. It
is not .Art or Humane Learning (though
both be good Helps ) in their proper
'Place, «when fan&ified of God, that can
Jead Men into a found Underftanding of
the Myftery of God's Covenant with jfa
,braham (the Ecclellaftical Reprefentative
.sjtf: Father of all believing Church Mem-
bers to the End of the World ) in the behalf
of himfelf and his Infant-Seed.

1 hope neither Mailer Smmet nor any of
his Perfwaflon, will be offended for telling
■him,- that I cannot fee of what ufe his florid

Traft

c Hi )

' .Pratt can be, unlefs to let the World fee
what an accomplifht -Patron the Antipedb-
baptiits have gotten to advocate and folicft
their "Caufe a gain ft the Pedobaptiils. \

As for the Pains he hath been at in quo-
ting fo many Greek and Latin Authors, it
might have been prevented, had Matter
Siezmt per us' d with Care (and void of Pre*
judice ) thofe Books of the Pedobaprifh,
who have difcovered the linfairnefs (to
fay no worfe ) of his PredecefTors, who
have made- as great a (hew in quoting the
/fame Authors, which now help to fill up and
grace Mailer Smmtfs Book, as Matter Sten~
net now doth.

All the Quotations, wherewith his Book
abounds ( though he could quote ten thou--
fand more as Ancient and Learned as them)
will never move me to believe any other,
tut that thelnfants of encovenanted Parents
have as real a Right to, and are as capable
of, the Ordinance of Baptifn, as the moft
adult ProfeiTor on Earth, be: his Faith never
fo ilrong.

Neither can they iTagger me in the ' fled-
falt Belief, that the. Word '^'% frgnifies
to wafh by Permit on, or fprbiuirig Water
on- the Subject, until I be direct.-;-;! ro the-
particular place in the Gofpel where the
Spirit of God exprefieth the Act of Dip-
H i . ping

(.Ijro

ping by the Derivative b«*7/'(* and; the
Act of Baptizing by the Primitive b»v?».
' But letfft I may be thought to exceed the
»foaS Bounds of a Pofticript, I (hall haftento
animadvert on a few Paflages in Mr. Stennn\
Book, wherein I think him befides the Text.
In Chap. £. Page 2$. Matter Stennet tells-
his Reader ( peremptorily ) that T/^o-and
******& figdne the fame things vit. to Dip-
This Affertion of his I have . I humbly con*
ceive) overthrown in Pages 77,78,79,80,8 1 .
and with inch clear Evidence of Scripture
Light, as Mafter Stetmet w\\\ never be able
to gain fay with Snccefs. To which I need
r.o add no more, then -to recommend to the
feriotis Consideration of the judicious and
unprejudiced Reader, the places of Scripture,
here following, that he might be the better
able to judge whether Mailer Supnet or I
be miftaken in the Signification we give of
the Word **'**$&

That the Word figaHies Warning by
Sprinkling f or Pouring out) Water on the
Subject, and not Dipping, will plainly ap-
pear by Mar. 7. 4. sind whenthty come from
the Market, except they ivafii &fy eat mt*
iai p?; Bctrrl^oyleum Except they be baptized they
eat not. 1 perfwade my * felf that Matter
Stennet will have a greater Regard to his,
Confcience, ( before God ) and to his Re-
putation among Men, than to believe cur

affirm*

C 157) ' /

affirm, that Dipping the whole Body under
Water is there intended.

Who can ( rationally ) think ( or be-
lieve ) that the Jews and Phdrifees ih^uld^
ftrip off their common Apparel, and put-
on. other Garments, fuitable to that Ce-
remony of Dipping, every time they went
to Dinner ? &e+

Such a Praaice-as-thh muft needs be at-
tended with great lnconveniency, not only
on the account of the trouble of it, but espe-
cially on the account of the danger to which *
fuch a Praftice would expofe the Health of
their Bodies* 1 cannot think that the My-
ftery of Skjohn Flayers. Cold Bathing was
known to them, that they Ihould there-
from take Encouragement to pradife fuch ^
frequent Dipping.

If then it be unreafonable to believe,:
that 'the- Baptifing pradtis'*-- by the Jsm-
and Fharifeesw^ not Dipping, the true
Senfe and Meaning of the place muft be;, .
that the Jews and Fharifees us'd alway be- -;
foie Dinner to walh their Hands, and that
becaufe they frequently convers'd 'with
Gentiles in. the Places of publick Concourfe,
and handled things whereby they thought
themfelves ceremonially defiled.

Of the fame Import is Luke 11. 3&
And when the Fharifee. faw *% he marvelled
that he had not -fir & wajhed before Dinner.

C 158 )

.-.-. t :*~u ^B-flrgjTtf *e^vs. That he was not
ba£tifed bciore Dinner.

Another place of Scripture, pertinent to

: i yrcicnr purpofc, is 1 Cor. too. 1, .2.

verj Bret ore ;/, Iirotdd not thatyejhoidd he

iQrartf^ h&w that at' our Fathers were -under

all faffed though the Sea. jlnd

( all baptized unto Afojes in the (loud and

lYl t'K Sea. *> -rxuaetc ?er (jrk:\u> i£nrli<ra,vlo vi 711

Here agnin we have the Derivative
%**ri*i*- in the Pailivc Voice. That which

:ive Rccourfe to thefe places of Scrips
fiire for, is, ro lay before Matter Stennet a
fair Opportunity to (hew his Ingenuity by
demonftrating to the. World that the IJrae-
//r^were ail dipt into the Cloud, which was
over them, and to prove that they were
immers'd or dipt in the Red-Sea, as they
patted through it. This if he cannot do^
I leave the impartial Reader to judge whe-
ther he or I be. mi (taken in our Apprehcn-
lion of the true Signification of the Word
fc-jL<7TT,{nt Matter Stcnncthc poiitively affirm?
that it llgnifies to Dip-, and I as poiitively
affirm, that the- Word fignines to Watt), by
Sprinkling or Pouring out Water en the
Perfon, or the thing to be wadied. Which
of thefe two Litigants is fafcr for the honeic
and well-meaning Reader, who undcrttands
neither Greek nor Hebrew, to believe ? As

I never

C i& )

I never intend to pin my Faith on-tfce*
Sleeve of any Man that ever breath'd on-
Earth, or on any Council of Men ( tho5
they liv'd the Age of ' Afctlmfalem) and vvere--
as learned as any meer Men that ever liv'd,. ■
who were not acted by an infallible .Spi-
rit ^ fo I am far from expecting or deliring,
that any Reader fhonld beimpos'd on by
the Opinion oijofcpb Stevnef&r James Bar*
ry. Let the ingenious and impartial Reader
then, who would not be- caught m the un- -
feen Net of Errour { guilded pver with -'■
the glittering Appearance of Gofpci Truth),
by hearty Prayer, beg ..the Eye Salve of the :
Spirit of Chrift, to anoint the Eyes ofhis -
Underilanding.,. that he- may become capa-
ble of difcernirjg things which are TpirituaL -
Let him diligently compare Scripture witli '•
Scripture,. Let him exercife that Reafoa ^
Wrhich God hath given him, Thefe are fonie
of the Ways and Means by which the only
Wife God brings a poor, humble, ( Self-
denying -I Sinner to the laving -Knowledge "
of. the Truth. This Method . being: con fci?
cntioufly obferved, let thejioneh: and well- -
meaning-:; Reader ferioufly confider .witfe- :„*
himfelf, whether it be truly rational to •
.tfudge and conclude^ that -the common Pra-
ctice of tie Jews, and- Fhariftes-y. above men.- -
.tioned, was to ftrip off their ufual wearing "
.Apparel, and. to put on others, more fit . •
H J for- *

C 16-0 )

for the pretended Occaflon of Dipping^,
and that every time they went to eat ?

And whether it be ( truly ) rational to,
believe that XheJfraelittsy but now mentioned ,
were lift up above the Cloudy and fo im-
Hiers'd or dipt into, the Cloud?

And whether it be rational to think and
believe, that the vaft Hofl; of Jfrart were all.
®£ them cover'd: over with the Waters of
the RedrSea as- they pa-fled' through ? oir
whether it can be rationally fuppos'd, that
fchey had, at that time, Garments fuitable to,
ti&th an Qccafloa of Dipping, which they
jut off when the Action- or Ceremony was,
wox}' For it is not to be queltioned, that
$ tbey; were all ( Men, Women, and Chil*
iron ) cover d with the Sea, they had no*
G^ments left which were not as wet as
themfelves 5 and confequently, no Cloths,
fit to- put on to preferve themfelves and
$02.11* little ones from, perilling with Coldi.

Thefe things are propos'd on purpofe to.
lay before every impartial Reader the Ir-
rationality and Groundlefnefs of Matter
Stomal Aflertion concerning the Word
lMrf{i$ fignifying the very feme with

Mafcer Sterner knows that the Difcovery
made of the. Difference between the two-
Words Bet*™ and B**T/£vy, hath fo wound-
ed their Caufc, that nothing is now left ta-

fupport

fifpport -and keep it from finking, but
the bare Affirmation. :of raiftaken Meny;ani
the Credulity of thofe of that Perfwafion,
who would fain have it fo as Mailer Stennet.^..
&c. affirms it is, and whosre refolved' (jra- -
ther thentheirCaufe Ihall fuSer Ship- wrack):
to believe what Mailer Stennet, >&c. tells .
them of the Signification of the £fo mucl^
controverted ) Word M^i-'f^* Whether -
Mailer Stennet be able to make good<what>
Me affirms or no, by fuch folid and con-
vincing Arguments as neither thwart the :
Principle ofc Reafon ( planted m our Na- ~
ture) or contradict and crofs the Rades^
prefcribed by God for felf Prefervationr ^
and which tends not to deftroy the Analo-
gy of Faith. If Mailer Stennet accounts.;
himfelf, and thofe of his Perfwafion, excii-<
fable for rejecting Mailer Rnffen his ijfp +
dixity as their Rule in Matters of Faitn,.^
when Mailer Rujfen gives no folid Reafon «
from God's Word, for what be fay& I hop©
Mailer Sterner will not blame the Pedbbap* -
tills for telling the World that they fee as t
Httle Reafon for their crediting Mailer,/
Stennet^ as Mailer Stennet fees foivhis ere- -
diting Mailer Rn$m, Mat. 7. 2.

I heartily wifh that Mailer Stennet zn$ I X
were as well agreed about the Signification ,,s
sf the W©?d now ifl?.Cdacrovef irej.asd In^
£u#s#f Bdfcvfeg Paints light to Baptifi%v.

C x6x >

as we are iii- our Refolution of believing no
Man's yhft. h». any farther then he pro-
duces the Word of Faith, to warrant what,
he offers to be believed in Matters of Re-
ligion.

I cannot- fo much wonder at the Miftake.
of good Men, who, have? taken Battt}^ to,
figniGe any kind of Wafliing, either, by.
Dipping, Sprinkling, or -pouring out Wa-
ter on the Subject, as I do at Mailer Sterwet
for oppoling and rejecting the Difcovery.
now made, which is fo plainly demon--
flrated. by the Light of Holy Scripture,
&t the goodly and learned Minifters ( now
living ) into whofe Hands the foregoing
Treatife hath come,. do Wonder they never.
(before) took Notice of it. And indeed,
liad.the lame Difcovery been made in the.
t&& of thofe Ancients, and Modern Di~
•;rkes, quoted by Matter Stomet^ I do in Gha-
xity believe, they durfl not reject or fin a<
gainlt fuch clear light.

Can any Man wonder at me, for alfert-
ing, that &***» the Primitive figniiies to
waft by Dipping only, and that B*ttv&7
the. Derivative iignifies to Wafii by Sprink-
ling, or Pouring out Water, on the. Sub-
mit,, without Dipping. When I find that'
the Spirit of God never makes ufe of ^iw
the Gofpel ) but in an ill Senfe, wk-
aefs the Scriptures quoted by Dr. Rvjftl

him-

c *6j. y

hrmfelf, as above in Page 8 1 , And \vjieri.
the fame Spiritnever makes ufe of the Deri-
vative BaW^o, but in a good fen-fe, as -e~
very obferving Reader ( who underll'ands-
the' Greek ) will find in every place irk the
New-Teftament, where the Holy Ghofb
makes any mention of Baptifmal Warnings.

And hew this carae^ to he. fo ftrangely
overlookt by fo many of God's faithful
Servants ( now in Glory ) who wanted,
neither Learning nor Love to the Truth,,
no Reafon. can be afllgn'd, but becaufe the,
only wife. God faw fit it fhould be Co.

Surely Mailer Stennct dares not think
(much lefs affirm) that the Holy God would
( in his Revealed Will ) alwayput a difFe--
vencz between the Primitive and the Des-
man ver in cafe the two. Words do not
differ in, their Senfe and Signification.

If Mailer Stennet can, ( herein ). difprove
what L fay, I (hall be neither afhanVct nor a-
fraid to -own my Errourr and forthwith
embrace that Principle which now I oppofe, .

To be free with Mafter Stennet^ I mwt
ilncerely. afTure himr, that it cannot enter
either into my Head- to conceive, or int.0*
my Heart to believe, that ever the God of
Love and ^lercy would appoint fuch a -Mode.*
or Way of Adminiftring'Baptifm.as crofles J
thofe Rules appointed ( by himfelf ) /for the i
Snefervatlon of the Health anct Life of man^

C iH )

kind* and which, in fome cafes, isimpofli-
ble to bepra&is'd, without hazarding botb
Health and Life of Adminiftrator, and'
the Subjects of Baptifm too.

Ma^qv Stenneti I perfwade my felf, mult,
needs be fenfibk how frequent and common
it hath been for Men and Women (of fick-
ly Conftitutions ) by getting wet in Head
or Feet, to fall into violent Fevers, where-
of they have ciy'd. And if fuch Colds got-
ten by a little wet, have prov'd mortal}
ftow much more dangerous muft k be for
to pip the whole Body of fickly and con-
sumptive Bodies, into Water in, Froft and
Snow?

Let Sir John Floyer aid- Matter S tenner-
fay and believe what they pleafe of their
Gold bathing, I ihall never account it any o-
ther than a tempting the Almighty, for
Men: and Women (In fuch dangerous Cafes)
to expofe themfelve^to fuch eminent Dan-
ger, and that upon a meer Conceit and Fan-
cy, that becaufe it is an Ordinance, there-
fore, no harm can. come thereby.

Let none be offended at my faying a meer
Fancy and Conceit, for I know not what
clfe to call it, there being neither exprefs^
Command, nor yet any Example ( in tcrmi-
vis ) to warrant fuch a Practice. God hatlv.
promifed, I grant, Prote&ioa in all our
Ways, JP/dA 91, it. But then, it wuft be

alfo

C i<5>)

alfa granted, that by all our ways, in.tftat
place, we are to underftand, thofe Ways
of Duty wherein our Holy God com-
mands us ta walk. We* muft not prefiime,,
that becaufe God hath the fovereign Com-
mand of the Elements^ and can reftrain
them when and how he pleafes, that there-
fore we may, without any Fear of Harm, lye-
down in the frozea Water, or jump into-
a flaming Fire.

He who mftituted the Ordinance of Bap-
tifro, hath, by his own bleffed Example,
taught us how we are to refill the Devil,
when tempting us to any Practice whica
might expofe us to Danger, Mm. 4. .6, fr
for all Chrifl knew (fall well) that God his
Father was able to prevent his falling.to the
Ground:, and to keep him from being hurt
fin cafe he fell to the GroundJ yet he
would not hearken to Satan ( fo as to gra-
tifie him ) in cafting himfelf down from the
Pinacle of the Temple, And he fhews the
Reafoa, viz. becaufe fo to da, would be a
tempting of God, which is forbidden, pent.
6m i 6. Notwithftanding the Promife ailed ged
for his Encouragement, yet Chrifl: would
not flir. He knew, that Promife was plead*
able by no Child of God, but he who was
In the actual Performance of fuck Duty
as God commands,

C 166 )

\Tfc will prove but a poor Argument to
infill on the Experience of fo many thou-
fands as are daily Dipt in thefe Kingdom?,,
yea, even in Eroft. and Snow, who have.
received no harm thereby. To fuch l
would propole that of the Wife Man, Eccl.
$.1 1 . From which place it plainly appears,
that. God's Forbearance to viiit a Perfon;
or a Multitude, with dererved'Punifhment>.
when acYing that which difpleafeth him, is
no Argument that the Praftice. of fuch will -
meet with Divine Approbation. That like-
wife in Ecckf 9. i. is worthy the Confidc-
ration of thofe, who from their prefcnt Im-
munities and Exemption from Judgment,
would fain perfwade themfelves that God.
loves them.

Secondly, he tells his Reader in Page 53.
of his 2 Chap, that the Promife mentioned in
Jiffs. 2. 39. intends only the Promife of
extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit, which
he.lookson to be fulfilled when the Gifts of
the Holy Ghoft were poured forth on the
A pottles.

' I crave leave to tell Mailer Stc?wct? that
this is a very poor Shift and an uncharitable
Evaiion, Ext on purpofe to exclude the In-
fants of Believers- from that Right Which
God's merciful Covenant with. Jbrab,vn
hath entailed on them. And that which
manifefts it to be fo, I will lay down in
three Particulars. &rMi»

r 167 )

Firtf, It is -beyond Difpute-, that thoTe
miraculous Gifts of the Spirit (intended
by Mailer Stcnnct) were not ' confer rd on
all the Believers, who were baptized by the
A po files, upon their ProfefTion, but very
few of them, who (favingly ) believed, had
thofe Gifts given them.

'Secondly, It is as certain, that the extraor-
dinary Gifts fpoken of were conferr'd on
feveral Hypocrites, who, on their Profef-
fion, were Baptized

Thirdly, Were it, as Matter Smnet would
have it,that that Promife made.ufe of by Peter
(a§a Motive- to induce and encourage the
Jews to believe in the Mejfi ah) would not have
had in it the force of a motive to ftir them
.up to a receiving the Lord Jefus, by Faith.
For Peter to have told thofe Jervs, who were
labouring under the Senfe of Guilt, for mur-
dering the Lord 'of Life ( whofe Blood they
vyifhed may be on them and on their Chil-
dren) that if they would repent and believe-
they fhould receive the miraculous Gifts of
the Holy Ghott y this would no way fuk
the Difeafe under which they laboured.

Let not Matter- Stetmei be difpleas'd for
telling him,, that herein. he plainly appeals
to be unskilful in the Word of Righteouf-
nefs, Heb. 5-. li. in that he propofes to
wounded, difpairing .Souls, fuch. an expedi-
ent as hath in it no manner of fuitablenefs

to

to relieve them In their fpiritual Diiirefs.

Who can believe that the miraculous-
Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, can reach the
wounded Conference of a difpairing Sinner/*

Surely, if they could, I know no folid
Reafon to conclude that^W^ the Traitor
and other Hypocrites who had the Gift of
Miracles, fhouldbe fentto Hell.

Could any thing fhort of the pardoning
Mercy of God ( in the virtue and merit of
that Blood of his Son which thofe Jews had
wickedly fhed) heal fuch Wounds in the guil-
ty Confcience ? Could any thing fhort ofthis
give them inward Peace and Comfort ? If
then, nothing elfe but this can relieve and-
eafe the felf- condemning Confcience, all the
Learning aad criticising Wit whereof Ma-
tter Stennet is Matter, can never difprove
me,- wheal affirm that the Promife pro*,
pos'd by Peter YSLjf&s-t. 39. is, andean be
no other than, that Promife which God made
to Abraham, and in him to his SeedjGto. 17.7.

This Promife of the Covenant of Grace,. ;
hath in it the flrongefb Motive and Encou-
ragement that can be, to move the wounded
Jews to lay hold on, that Jefus whom they
liad Crucified, and whofe innocent Blood
they wifhed may be on them and on their
Children.

By laying hold on this Crucified jefus by
Eaitbj they obtain a free and full Pardon of

that

C i*9 )

pat their murderous Act, and all their-6*
ther Sins ( original and actual J accordW
to Ails \ 3. 39. And by their laying holdprt
God's Covenant of Grace, they lay. a fnre
Foundation whereon to bottom their Hope
and Comfort concerning their poor Chil-
dren. Neither of which Benefits could
come by their being made Partakers of all
the common Gifts of the Holy Ghofl. I
cannot fee how Matter Sunnn can poffibly
avoid owning himfelf in a palpable Error,
about this Promife. I heartily wifh that
Mafter S tenner and all of his Perfwafion, wha
are fuch Enemies to Infant-Baptifm, were
Better acquainted with the fpiritual Intend
of God's Covenant with Abraham in behalf
of himfelf and his Ecclefiaftical Seed, thea
It appears they are.

Their great Miftakes about this Covenant
is molt certainly the Ground and Caufe of
all their Hard-hearted nefs againft poor In-
fants. I am( fixedly ) perfwaded that the
Apoftles themfelves were of the fame Opi-
nion concerning poor Infants before -they,
received the Holy Ghoft, as thefe are now,.
This plainly appears by their ignorantly
and uncharitably rebuking thofe who were
bringing their Little ones to Chrift, for
which the Lord Chrift {harply rebuked them.
After the Holy Ghoft. was given them, on
Ghrift's Afceniion, they then were given to

know

( i?o )
know the Myficry of God's Covenant
witfh Abraham, and how that the Grace
exhibited in that Covenant, -doth extend to
the Seed of a&qal Believers, as well as to
their Parents. After this the Apoilles ne-
ver carried it ruggedly to poor Babes.

Secondly, In Page 3$\ of his 2 Chap. He
denys peremptorily that any Infants are
actually in Covenant, or that they have any
Right to the Seal of Kaptifm, in Right of
their Parents Faith, until they themfelves
do believe and profefs their Faith.

Herein I crave leave to tell him, that the
Infant Seed of true Believers are more firm-
ly interefted in the Covenant of Abraham^
by God's own Sovereign Ad of Grace^
than they are by their own- Aft, when made
actual Believers. Tho' the elect Infants of
a true Believer cannot lay hold on Chrift by
Faith as Adult Believers do, yet the Grace
of God's Covenant hath made effectual Pro-
vifion for that Defect in them, in. that it
hath comprehended them in the Covenant,
as plainly appears by the exprefs Words
of the. Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. and ranked
them among Believers, terming them fuch,
as well as the moll Adult. This is plain
from Mat. 18. 6. And terming them Holy,
as 1 Cor. 7. 14. And owning them to be-
long to the Kingdom of Heaven, witness;
Mat, 19. 14. and alluring us, that in Hea-
ven.

'( i?i )
ven, their Angels do alway behold 1ihe
Face of God, Mat. 18. 10. j

What higher or greater Character was
ever, or can pofllbly be given to the -molt
eminent, adult Believer, that ever breath'd,
to prove their Right .and Heirfhip to the
-Kingdom of Glory ?

And yet, poor Infants muft be. denied
Water- Baptifm, the external Sign and Seal
of God's Holy and Merciful Covenant,
: which confers all thefe ineff imable Blef-
iings and Privileges upon them, meerly be-
cause they cannot fpeak for themfelves. For
my part, I cannot feeany need poor Infants
have of Speech, &c. to qualifie them for
Baptifm, feeing they haveiuch an infallible
Advocate as the Son of God to fpeak for
; them.

I cannot but wonder 'how any ManVCon-
rfcience (which bath the lead Sparkof fpe-
rcial Grace in it ) can read, without Trem-
bling, that Divine Caution in Mat.i 8. 10.
and at the fame time, to be fo inflexibleand
hard hearted towards : 'poor, helplefs In-
fants, towards whom the Lord Jefus Ghrilfc
carried -himfelffo tenderly, Mar. 10, \6.

Thirdly , In chap. 4. page 75. Mafler Sten-
mt tells his Reader that Infant Baptifm and
fee Sign of the Crofs ( added to Baptifm)
ibear an equal Date* For Proof whereof he
iquotes .TtmftMy faying, that Un&ioruand

the

C *£* )

thoCrofs came in with Infant-Baptifm, of
focp which TertHpan fpeaks. Whereas Ter-
tudutn ( as quoted by Mailer Stcmm ) fpeaks
not a Word of the Sign of the Crofs, as ap-
pears by the Words -of the Quotation.

But fuppofe Tertuiiian had affirm'd fuch
a Falfhood, as is unjuftly father'd on him,
on purpofe, no doubt, to expofe Infant-
Baptifm, and the Sign of the Crofs to the
fame.Contempt, am I bound to credit Ter-
tullian in in fuch a Report ? when it is evi-
dent, that there be Ancients more ancient
and more found and orthodox in the Truths
of the Gofpel than Tertuliian, who in their
Writings, give ws Aflurance, that Infant-
Baptifm bears date from the Days of the
Apoftles, which cannot ( without notorious
lying ) be affirm'd of the Sign of the Crofs,
as the fame is us'd in the Church of Rome.

Fourthly j In Chap. 6. Page 151. Matter
Stennct (carefully ) quotes the Words of the
Aflembly of Divines Annotations on Rom.
6. 4. to confirm his Reader in the Belief,
that the Aflembly of Divines were for Dip-
ping ( in Baptifm ) and againft Sprinkling
or Pouring out Water on the Perfon, but
warily conceals what the Aflembly of Di-
vines fay in the Confeflion of their Faith,
wherein they tell the World that Dipping
in Baptifm is not neceflary, but that Bap-
tifm is rightly adminiftred, by Pouring out

or

( 173 )
or Sprinkling Water on the Perfbn^for
v which they quote Heb. p. 10. 19, 20. jiki
2. 41, 42. A&t 16. 33. Mar. j. 4.

It had, doubtlefs, been more for Matter
Stennet ^Credit, either not to have mention-
ed the AfTembly of Divines at all, or elfe
to have quoted the Words of their Confef-
fion of. Faith, as well as the Words of their
Annotations. Matter Stenneis Pra&ice
herein is like that of Dr. Rttjfell\ in cur-
tailing the Obfervations of Learned Matter
Leigh on the Word B*7r™, what feem'd to
make for his Cauie, he takes Notice of it,
and improves the fame to advantage his
Caufe. But what he knew ( full well ) made
againft him, he ( fraudulently ) concealed,
which Pra&ice will neither advance God's
Caufe and Intereft in the World, nor yet
bring Credit or Comfort to the Authors
of fuch difmgenious and unfair Practices.

Fifthly^ In Chap. 6. Page 123. Matter
Stennet tells his Reader, that there feems
no neceffity to concludej that the 3000 con-
verted by Peter's Sermon, Jlslsz. 41. were
all Baptized in one Day, whereas the Word
faith exprefly, that they were baptized, and"
added to the Society ( or Church) of the
Apoftles the very fame Day. And albeit
Matter Stennet would fain perfwade his
Reader, that in cafe thofe 3000 were Bapti-
zed the fame Day,. yet it doth not appear

that

C 174 )

thztyeter baptiz'd them,and that ■theT'wclve
Appftles and 70- Difciples, who were all
Miniftersof Chrift, may very well be fup-
pofed to have immers'd them, in much lefs
time than the fpace of a Day.

What Ground hath Mailer Stcmctto&vp-
port his Supposition, that it was as he fup-
pofes, feeing it doth not appear (by what
account we have of that Work ) that the
70 Difciples were ( that Day ) with the 1 2
Apoftles; there is no mention in all the
Chapter of them, neither doth it appear
that any other betides Peter did* baptise them.
I ( for my own part) rather believe,
that that great Multitude were baptized, by
Perfuiion, or fprinkling Water upon them,
not by immeriing or Dipping their whole
Bodies under the Water. The ground of
my Belief herein is as follows.

Firtt, The Apoftles wfroi were (infallibly)
guided by the -unerring Spirit of Truth, they
knevv that Chrift (in the' grand Com million,
Mat. 2,8.- 19. ) required not to Dip the
Whole Body under Water, but to wafhwith
Water, by pouring out or -fprinkling the
Water on the Subject. : This Mode or man-
ner of Baptizing- being, moil certainly, ea -
fierfor the Administrator, there being no
need of an extraordinary Strength of Body
to apply Water -Baptifm to' the Subiects
thereof/ byf Pouring out" (or fprinkling;

the

c im

Sprinkling the Water ; whereas Dipping or
Plunging the whole Body canoot be done,
in fome Cafes, without a miraculous Strength
of Body. And as it is moil eafie for the
Adminiftrator, fo it is moil certainly, the
moll fafe way for both Adminiftrator and
the Parties to be baptized, both Adult and
Infants, there being in this way of Pour-
ing out or Sprinkling the Water, no man-
nerof Danger, to the Health and Life of
Adminiflrator, though weak and infirm in
Body, nor to the moft fickly and weak Con-
futations, whether Adult or Infants, tho*
in the fharpeft Weather that can come. It
is not fb in Dipping *, befides both which
this way of Baptizing by Pouring out or
Sprinkling the Water on the Subjeft, doth
every way more quadrate and harmonize
with the Analogy which is between the
^outward Sign and the inward and fpiritual:
Work of the Holy Ghoft, in regenerating
the Soul, ineffectual calling, then Dipping
the whole Body under Water doth. .

This I have been enabled to make good

in the foregoing Treatife^by fuch plain

fcriptural Arguments, as remain ftill un-

anfwer'd,and which Mafter 5«»»a will ne-

! ver be able to overthrow, by all the Help

I the Lexiographers and Latin and Greek

I Ancients in Grdc. Colkdge, ( on which he

, depends) can afford this Caufe. To which

I I - IwiH

( i?6 )

I will add, and by all the Arguments which
his Wit and Learning can pick out of thofe
pretty Romantick Stories which hisfo much
admired Sir John Floytr tells him, of the Be-
nefits which come by Cold bathing. They
muft needs have their Faith built on a firm
Foundation, who, for Arguments, run to
fuch trifling and nugatory . Topicks as Sir
John Floyer's Cold Bath, and Mailer Mengc^
his Mathematical Demonftration, with their
wrefted s and mifunderftood Metaphors.
-Sir John Floytrs Account he gives of Cold
\ Bathing, in Favour of Immerfion or Dip-
ping in Baptifm, will rather countenance
and make for the juggling Conjurers of the
JRomijh Synagogue, who make the Holy Sa-
crament of Baptifm no better than a Spell
or a Charm, than to induce any thinking
ferious Mind to embrace Dipping in Bap-
tifm to be the Mode prefcribed by the
Wifdom of Chrifl,becaufeas Sir John feems
to fuggeft ( and Matter Stetmet believes )
that Dipping the whole Body under Water,
whether robuft and healthy, or fickly or in-
firmBodies,and whether it be in hot or in the
coldeft Weather which comes, fo it be done
in the way of an Ordinance, it is rather a
Keftorative to, and a Prefervative of, the
Health of the Body, than otherwife. A
pretty Device to make credulous Folk in
love with Dipping. Believe this who can.

For

( 177 )

For nay part I cannot. And my'Reafon is
this, viz.. becaufe Cbrift hath inftituted and
appointed that Holy Ordinance ( of Water

^Trfn] Kt0M a vifible SiSn> t0 fiSnifie
and feal the fpintual Bleffings of the Cove-
nant of Grace tb the true Believer, and to
ius Church-Seed ; not to effeft miraculous
Cures on Humane Bodies.

, lJ?™?h .th.at there is no limiting the
^ords Almighty Power, who can work a
-Cure where, when, and how hepleafes But
we muft confider and believe , that i pffe ad
ejje, non valet jirgumemum. We muft not

"32.»/2Mnthe Power t0 the Win of God
It Matter Stow* and thofe of his Perfwa-
■»on, do think that the Relation given tv
the Authors he quotes concerning the

Gnres eff^ed(byl)ippi„gthewTo?eBo!

dy in the Water ) will afford a convincing

Argument to prove Immerfion, the only
S°/ ^""{^g that Ordinance, i

hope he will allow me to ballance this with
| whdt Perf°n* ( Yet living) know to beSe

conceramg young Infants, who have been fo
ifar gone in Fits, that all who havefeen
I them have difpaired of their Life who
i^^P^.. hy Pouring outthe wlte

&t^\nT^m^mlHeviv'd ™* re-
cover d to Ad miration. If any be fo un-

chantableas toqueftion the Truth of what

} here offer to Confideration, the MatS

I J 2, r*€

Ct78 )

of Fad -will be effectually proved. Befldes
which, there, have been too many Inftances
of Perfons who have felt the Iacoveniency
of being Dipt in Froit and Snow ^ fome of
whom I my felf have known.

. I have read, in the Writings of good Men,
of fome who have been in fuch apparent
Danger by the Praftice of Dipping, that
both the Adminiftrator ( hirafelf ) and the
Perfon to be Dipt, had, unavoidably, been
drown'd, had not. a By-ftander leapt into
the Water and recover'd both \ which,- in
my Judgment, affords an Argument rather
againft . than for Dipping.

Sure I am, my Reafon tells me, that the
God' of Mercy, who prefers Mercy before
.Sacrifice, Matt. 9. ig. would never ap-
prove of fuch a Rigidity in any of his Ser-
vants, who lay fuch ftrefs on a Ceremony,-
as to expofe the Life of a Man for it.

\ Whenever Matter Sunmt pleafes to en-
counter the Argument, grounded on the
apparent difference between js*Vt« the Pri-
mitive, and j8*TTi£« its Derivative. He will
find more in it, then, I am apt to oelieve,
he will be willing to own, to his Admirers.
He will not find in it fuch a little criticifm
as he fancies he found in ***** wom«\ He
may fearch all his Antiquity and Lexiogra-
phers, of whom he feems fi>confident, be-
fore he can find out an Hebraifm to help
his Caufe here. A

C 179 3

hfecond Reafon, why I canndt belief
that the 3000 abovementioned were bap-
tized by Immerfion, is, becaufe it is not
rational to judge, that' fo vafl a Multitude,
who came under fuch a fudden and unex-
pected Change, fhould come prepared and
furniihed with Garments, fuited to fuch an
Occajion, as Dipping the whole Body un-
der Water.

Neither doth it corrfrft^ith that Mode-
fty and Decency reqBired in the GofpeJ,
that they fhould be baptized Naked ; facli
a Pofture not becoming fo publick and fo-
lemn an Ordinance ^ in which the Eyes of
God, Angels and Mm% were fixed on
them,

And it is as contrary to found Reafon,
to believe th?y were lipped ;; '.h-? &|3©a-
rel they then were, th 1 >Q] - re-

pugnant to the Law r . \tioii.

I cannot ice how Maffy ~M a-

void here, but by flying to the thmifn
Jljfykm of pretended Miracle? . The which
if he doth, he wi'li thereby fall uacfe: ilvz
fame Confute with that Synagogue of Rome,
who are forced to rupport their lying Do-
ctrines with pretended Miracles, 2 Tfcf 2,
1 1, 12.

And whereas it hath been conceived,
that had the Practice of Dipping been con-
tinued, many new vain Niceties and Dif-

I 3 putes

(i8o)

putes about Baptifm had been prevented';
I dare prefume, that fhould all the Pedo
fcaptifts in England agree to baptize by
Immerfion, on Condition the Anabaptifts
would yield to baptize the Infants of be-
lieving Parents, they would never yield
that Point.

By this it would appear, as now it
doth, who are the vain Difpuurs, the Pe-
dobaptifts, for maintaining and vindicating
the Rights and Privileges entail'd on the
Seed of Believers by God hiinfelf •, or the.
Antipedobaptifts, in depriving them there-
of. Any, not deprived of common Senfe,.
rmift needs own it to be more commenda-
ble and allowable, to contend for that
which is a fubiiantial ( or an effential )
Branch of God's Covenant of Grace, then
for that -which is ( at belt ) but a Ceremo-
ny. The frrft of thefe, vit. that Branch1
( or fubftantial part ) of God's Covenant,
wherein the Infants of Believers are con-
cern'd, is of far greater confequence, than
to be fo eafily parted with by thofe, who
underftand how great a Mercy and Privi-
lege is, by that Branch of the Covenant,,
conferred on Believers, and their poor
Infants.

For Illuftration fake, I will fuppofe, that
[a Great Man ( by his Ml Will and Teila-
ment ) fettles his Efirstc on .Matter Stwnct,

and:

C 181 )

and his Children ; my Reafon tells me,trfatr
Mafter Stemet would not like well, that
any Man ( or Party of Men ) fhould go
about to nullifie that part of the Will,
wherein his Infants are concern'd. And
in cafe that defigning Party Ihould alleadge,
for their fo doing, that Mailer Stemet\-
Infants are non intelligent Subpfts, who
underftand not what a Will means, neither
are capable ( at prefent ) of managing fuch
an Eflate, would not Mailer Stennct account:
fuch a Deiign unjuft and wicked ? No man
of-Senfe but would conclude, that Mafter
Stennet would oppofe fuch ill defigning
men ^ And would account it his Duty to
fpeak and act for his poor Infant?, who can
nekher-TpeaJc nor afrfor them Pelves.

Whether the prefent metaphor be. apt
and proper to the bujinefs la hand, I leave
to Mafter SrennetU Conference to deter-
mine.

Some have obje&ed thus, Mailer SteweK
a'gainft whom you print, he is bothr
genious and a good Man, and nijti
Perfwaiion are very good People, ana
fore ought: not to befallen upon in iucna-
Day as this.

To fuch ObjeSors as thefe I anfwerv

That neither Ingenuity, norGoodnefs in a

Perfon or a Party, ought to gag or muzzle1

up, the Mouths, or /Pens of Minifters from

- I 4 , detecting

( i8* )

dste&ing and. decrying Errours in Holy
Religion.

Yea, I will be bold to affirm ( let who
will cenfure or condemn mc for the famej
that the more ingenious and good a Perfon
or Party feems to be, the more dangerous
are their Errours ^ and by far the likelier
they are to Spread and mfefl;, (where they
come J bnwary People, who are not capable
of dillinguiffiing Truth fromErrour.

Satan is never more likely to enfaare,
than when he transforms himfelf into an
Angel of Light, 2 Cor. 1 1. 1 4, 1 \'.

it is an eld Maxim, and as true now as

r, That in Nomine Domini ^ imifit omne
Mditrn, In the Name of the lx>rd, aU
Milctifef begins. The Romifn Jeluits ( in
Mafquerade ) hope, in this Day, to root
out of thele Kingdoms the Proteftant Re-
ligion, and the true -Upholders and Main-
tainers of the fame, and that under a plau-
llble and ipecious Pretence of fecuring and
upholding the Church.

That Mailer Stamet is an ingenious and a
good Man* and that' many of that Per-fwa-
hon.are gracious goed People, I have al-
ready granted, But what then?

Mull their fpreading Errours ( which are
grown fo epidemical-), be, in Complement,
conniv'd at and let alone?

Sure

C >*j )

Sure I am, that either the Pedobaptiffs of
the Anabaptifts, mult be in an Errour, in
thofe Principles wherein they oppofe each
other. Both cannot be right in the fame
Principle about whichthey differ. This is
a Truth too plain and obvious to be deny'd.
If the Anabaptifts be in the right, why do
not the Obje&ors openly efpoufe them
Can fe, and conform to their Principles?

If the Anabaptifts be wrong and corrupt"
in their Principles, why fhould the Gbje&orS
blame any Man, for dete&ng and decry*-
ing their Errours I and that in hopes of
convincing them and recovering them from-'
thofe Errours, and; likewife for preventing*
the Churches of God in the Nations being -
over-run with Anabaptifm.
. " Secondly i Far be it froirr me to fpeak of
write againft any thing that is good and^
commendable in any Man of what Party"
foever.

Thirdly r I abfoltitely deny, that what I '
oppofe in Matter Stermet, is any part of
hlsGoodnefs, namely, his denying the DI- ■-
vine Right of Believers Infant-Seed to Wa- 4
ter Baptifm, andthat baptising by Sprink- .
ling or Pouring out Water on the Subject,,,,
is not right Baptifm.

Fourthly, I hope the Objectors vwl allovr--
me to tell them, that there are many good'
Men of other Perflations, whofe errontous"
1 5 -Piii-£i>-

C 184: )

Principles the Objectors will own it their
Duty to oppofe and witnefs againft, not-
withftanding they be otherwife good Mea
in the main.. Why fhould Mafter Swmtt^
be fpared more than they? \

Suppofe Aaron ( the Saint of the Lord )
were now in London , andJbou.ld make a
Golden-Calf for the- People of London to
Worfftip God by, as he did in the Wilder-
nefs, Exod. 34. 4^ ?. Would the Obje&oss
think or fay, that the People of London
eugftt to Woi;fhip God by his Image, be-
aaufe Aaron was a holy, good Man?

Fifthly, 1 have already infoi m'd my Rea-
der how the good Spirit of Gcd.hath taught
and enabled me to diHinguifh between Per-
ibns and their Errours, whether the fame
"fee in Principle or in Pra&ice. The Perfons
of errcmious Men I love^ and fhaUr I hope7
fee ready to pay that Deference and Refpeft
to. their Perfons which the Character they-
%ear, calls for at my Hands. But their Er-
neurs I am commanded to hate and re*
jjrove: I no where find that the Holy God,
viho commands my Love and Charity to be
intended to the Name and Perfon of my.
Brother (or Neighbour,) doth allow me
( in pretence of Charity ) to favour or .con-
Dive at his Errours and Miftakes in Holy
Religion^ but the contrary, as appears
j£tm. 17, 22. Effxfi fc i i* Yea, God him-

fetf"

felf adiires - me, that to recover ^ Perfoa
from the Errour of his Way* is the higher!
Ad of Charity to an erring Brother, which
one Chriilian is capable of expreffing to- .
wards another Chriilian in this Life, Jam.
5 19, 20. And how this can be expe&ed
when a Perfon's or a Party's Errour is
wiiak'd at, and not difcovered and -confuted.,
I am not able to underftand.

It will again be objected. But thofe- Points
wherein we and they differ, are not Fin>-
da mental.

jfofo. In three particulars.

Firtt, By the matchiefs Induftry of that- j
Party, who fpare neither Pains nor Charge
to propagate their Principles, in order t64
profelyte the Members of other Congregs-,
tions both rn City and Country ( to their ,
way ) it mould feem they look on the Dif-
ference, between -us and them to be -Funda-
mental : witnefs the elaborate Iaduftry of 1
Matter Stennet^ and others of that Perfwa- -
fion, in raking into, and lifting the very :
Afnes c< miftaken Antiquity, to pick up~
what may trelp their bleeding Caufe. As
alfo the great Charge which that Party are
at in their large Subfcriptions to Matter »
Stennets fo much commended Book, there
being ( as I am credibly informed ) no lefs
than 6500 of them fubfcribed, which at 2 K .
the Book, amou nts to 6 50/, Theft Books -

C 1 86 )
sre now adifperfing-up and down in Gty
and Country. And albeit there be as little
in the Book to the purpofe, for which is is
intended, as any I have feen on that Sub-"
jed j yet it being varniiht and fent out with
the enticing Allurements of ftrangeTongues,
&c. and bearing the Name of its Author
in its Frontifpiece, it willy i doubt not,
be moil taking with thofe who lead under-
stand it.

SecoW^,\Vhat though the Anabaptifts do
own no otherFonndation (whereon to build
their Hope for Salvation) but JefasChrift
the Son of God. Yet, to me it feems plain,
that in denying God's Holy Covenant with
Abraham ( the Ecclefiailicai Repi cfentative
of all believing Church -Members, and their
Infant-Seed to the end of the World ) to
be the Covenant of Grace, and their fhut-
irjg out the Infants of Believers from fearing
in the BJ'efiings of that Covenant \ and their
holding and teaching, that the Sinners own
perfcnal Ac~ts of Faith, and Repentance is
that whicrrintkies a Sinner (ox which gives
him a Right ) to the Covenant of Grace •,
they cannot beexcus'd from being funda-
mentally erronious, to bold and teach, that
Perforial Qualifications give Right to God's
free Covenant of Grace, is as truly an Er-
rour againit the Foundation; as it is to make

tlie

C 187 )

the Virgin Mapfr or an Angel, the Object
of our Hope.

The Saying ol : Augufiine, the founded of
the Ancients, is moft Orthodox, and to be
acknowledged by all found and experien-
ced ProteltantS. Gratia nullo modo gratia,
nifi eft omni modo Cratmta. Grace,.faith he,
is no way Grace, unlefs it be every way
moil free,. Aug. de lib*. Arbk.
. Thirdly^ What though it were granted,
that the Anabaptiils are not fundamentally
erronious •, yet confidering the fpreading
and infectious Nature of Errour, and how
receptive Man's corrupt Nature is of the
fame, efpecialiy confidering the Mifchief al \
ready done in theChurches of Chriir, by the
exorbitant Growth of Anabaptifm, thefe
feveral Years pah:, it may well feem ftrange
to any thinking and judicious Chriftian
that any mould be blarnd for endeavour-
ing to Item the Tide of fuch a fpreading
and prevailing Errour, which equally
threatens the unchurching all the Churches
in the Kingdoms which are not of their
Per fwa lion.

A little Leaven Ieaveneth the whole
Lump, i Cor. y 6. A little Fire in a wrong
place of the Houfe ( if not prevented in
time ) will foon devour a whole Town,
Jam. 3.-5. -A fmall Quantity of Pqifoa-
will kill the ftrongefl; Man living. And

is

C i88 ) ■
it is never more likely fo to do, than when
it is convey'd in a Man's Drink or Phyfick.

The Application of thefe Metaphors, I
leave to the Care and Ingenuity of thofe
who are unwilling to be infenfibly caught
in the Nets of thofe who lie in wait to deceive,
Ephef. 4. 14.

To fuch I would-, only fay, that the near-
er an Errour (in Holy Religion) comes
( in ftiew and outward Appearance; to
Gefpel Truth, the more taking it is with
well meaning People, who are not acquaint-
ed with the Depths of Satan, Rev. 2. 24.
Let fuch Perfons frequently read, withear-
neft Prayer to God's Throne of Grace, that
of /W, Rom. 16. 17, * 8.

Fourthly, I know of no Inconveniency that
can attend a ferious cautioning Churches,
Families, and- particular Perfons, to have a
fpecial Care they be not caught in the Nets
of gilded and painted Errours.

Let the times prove never fa dangerous
to the Proteftant Intereft, the Objectors' will
find I ftand on a Foundation whichwill ne-
ver fail them that build: thereon. I am far
from defigning to alienate the AfFe&ions of.
Proteftant Brethren and Neighbours one
from another, in fuch a gloomy Day, as to
me feems to be near. For all who know mey
will witnefs for me, that my Judgment is,
that for all-Proteftaatsx who ssfolre not to

be

C 189)

bcPapifts, it is their undoubted Duty, and
will prove the Intereft and Safety both of
Non and Conformifts, to unite as one Man,,
againft the common Enemy, who feeks e^
quallythe Euine-ofall.

But tho' I grant it to be the Duty of ah%
both Non and Con, to unite in AfFe&ion,
andxommon Intereft, I cannot fee how u-
niting in erroaious Principles can. be jufti*
fied.

The Improvement whicfr Anabaptift
Writers have made of the unwary Concep-
tions of good Men, who, for want of clear-
er Light, have granted,, that the Word
a**-ii£«. doth, promifcuoufly,. fignifie either
to Dip into, or ta Wafli by Sprinkling or
Pouring out Water on the Subjed, ought .
to make us the more confederate and wary
how we comply with fo vigilant an Adver-
fary, who watches all Occasions to lay hold
of the leaft feeming Advantage,, to help
their finking Caufe; As in this very Cafe
about the Senfe and: Meaning, of the. Word
s*»ir^ moft plainly appears.

The impartial Reader may obferve how
faft a Hold Mailer Sunntt takes of the Con*
ceffion of good Men about this Word ; the
which he backs with a new coin'd Device,
9fc. pretended Miracles, than which he
could not have propos'd a more Staggering
and enfnaring Temptation, to put his un-
wary

C *9° )
wary aad' injudicious Reader out of Con-
ceit and Love with the Baptifm received in
Infancy and by Sprinkling, and to. fall in
love with Immerfion or Dipping. The lat-
ter of thefe being attended, as he informs
us, wich a miraculous Cure of bodily Dif-
eafes, and that as foon as the Party immers'd
is lifted up from under the Water. What
can be more taking with poor credulous
Perfons, who labour under malignant and
prevailing Diilempers of Body, than this?

Such Perfons who have but an implicit
Faith to* credit this chymerical Whym, need
not the Advice of thePhyiicianyor the help
of Phyfick, ( the ordinary Means appointed
by God for helping Humane Bodies, -when
Cck or ailing ) 'tis but renouncing their
Infant-Baptifrn, and fubmitting to the Cold
Bath of Believers Baptifm, by being Dipped
under the Water, and the Work is done.

I cannot, but wonder, thk a Man of
Mailer Stennm Reading, QiouloSaot remem-
ber and confider, that to pretend to, and
boaflsof Miracles, for the proof of a Party's
Religion being the true Religion, is, by all
Orthodox Proteftant Divines and Churches,
accounted one of the infallible Chara&crs
of a falfe Church.

That the Do&rincMeliver'd by the Son
of God, and tranfmitted to us by the Mi-
niftry of his holy Prophets, and bleffed

A pottles,

C *9* )

Apoities, was confirm'd (over and over/
by Miracles from God, is granted.

And that God^ is frill, and ever will be r
the fame, as able to effect ( or produce >
Miracles^ on anyOccailon, as ever, mulb
be acknowledged. But it mull alfo be
remembred, and acknowledged, that *u
pflh\ ad ejfe, rton valet jfrgumenMm. We
mufrr not argue from the Power,, to the
; Will of God.

The Cannon of the Holy Scripture being
now perfect and compleat, we are not to
expeft or look for new Miracles.

The Premifles confider'd, I hope, when
the Impartial Reader hath duly examfrfd
and weighed, in the even Ballance of God's
Word, what is here offer'd ta -Cbhfidera-
tion ; he will not be offended at my telling
Matter Stennet, that nothing could poilibiy
be offer'd in favour of Immerflon, which
more expofes it to the .diflike of every inv
partial and ingenuous Reader,, than this of
pretended Miracles. - '

For it is but rational to conclude, that
if Mafter StSnmt knew ^himfelf able to pro-*,
duce but one fingle Text ( either Precept
or Example, in plain Terms ) to jufrifie
and make good the Do&ririe of Immerfion,
he would never have expos'd himfelf at
fuch a rate,, by his •treading fo near the
Fo'otfteps of the ApoftoIicaL Synagogue, at

: • Rome7

Rome, in flying to the Afylum of their pre-
tended Miracles: As alfo his fining fo
many Pages with frivolous and needlefs
Quotations to fupport and Credit his Caufe.
God's Truth ftands in no need of pretend-
ed, lying Miracles, or of humane Tefti-
monies,to recommend it to the Confcience
of true Believers. God's Truth carries
with it its -own Evidence, to fatisfie the
renewed Confcience that is is God's Truth.

I conclude with alluring Mailer Stcnnet^
and thofe of his PerfwaSon, that I am Hill
(and hope to die ) in perfed Charity with
him and them, notwithftandhg the Plains
nefs and Sharpnefs here ufed to prevent
the Spreading and Growth of Anabaptifm.

And if Matter Stcnmt (or any of his
Pet* fwaiion ) can enervate and confute ( by
Arguments plainly Scriptural ) the Argu-
ments Itid down in the foregoing Treatife,
to prove th6 Divine Right of Infant Bap-
tifm • and likewife to prove, that the right
mode of adminiitring Water Baptifm, mu4t
be by Sprinkling ( or Pouring ) the Water
on the Subjeft} the next Appearance I
make in Print, (hall be to acknowledge my
Mifhkes (about Baptifm, &c.) to the
World j and heartily to beg Pardon :of
Matter Stennzt, and the reft of that Pen-
fwafion, for mifreprefenting their Prin-
ciples, ( as 4 have done ) in cafe my Argu-
ments be proved unfcripturaL . If

c <m )

If this Book remains Hill unconfuted^ t
heartily beg, that every Church, Family,
or particular Perfon, who have reapt Be-
nefit by it, will give God hearty Praife for
fuch plain Difcovery on this controverted
Sub/eft.

In cafe Mailer Stennep renew the Occa—
Hon of further Difpute, he may (perhaps)
find more Remarks made on what is con-
tained in his Book, which he will never be
able to make good by God's Word foundiy
explained and rightly appiy'd*

I

Wkffl